Mark Zuckerberg is set to take the stand this week as the key witness in a highly unusual $8 billion trial, where the Meta CEO faces allegations of running Facebook as an unlawful enterprise that enabled the unauthorized harvesting of users’ personal data.
Shareholders of Meta Platforms — the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp — have filed a lawsuit against Mark Zuckerberg and other current and former executives, alleging repeated violations of a 2012 agreement with the Federal Trade Commission to safeguard user data.
The case stems from revelations in 2018 that Cambridge Analytica — a now-defunct political consulting firm that worked on Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign — had improperly accessed data from millions of Facebook users.
Shareholders are seeking to hold Zuckerberg and the other defendants financially accountable, demanding they reimburse Meta for over $8 billion in fines and related expenses the company incurred following the Cambridge Analytica scandal — including a record $5 billion penalty imposed by the FTC in 2019 for breaching the 2012 agreement.
The defendants also include former Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg; board member and venture capitalist Marc Andreessen; and former directors Peter Thiel, co-founder of Palantir Technologies, and Reed Hastings, co-founder of Netflix.
Zuckerberg and the other defendants, who declined to comment, have rejected the accusations in court filings, describing them as "extreme claims." Meta — which is not named as a defendant — also declined to comment.
The non-jury trial is set to begin Wednesday in Wilmington, Delaware, and is expected to last eight days. The proceedings will largely center on events and board discussions from over a decade ago, examining how Facebook’s leadership carried out the terms of the 2012 agreement.
Although the trial centers on past policies, it unfolds amid ongoing privacy concerns surrounding Meta — particularly over its use of user data to train AI models. The company maintains that it has invested billions since 2019 to strengthen its privacy protection efforts.
Jason Kint, CEO of Digital Content Next, a trade association for content providers, stated that the case will reveal crucial details about what the board knew—and when—about the data of users, who now exceed 3 billion daily across Meta’s platforms. “There’s an argument we can’t avoid Facebook and Instagram in our lives,” he said. “Can we trust Mark Zuckerberg?”
MOST DIFFICULT CLAIMS
Two years ago, the defendants moved to dismiss the case before trial, but the judge denied their request. “This is a case involving alleged wrongdoing on a truly colossal scale,” said Travis Laster, the judge handling the case at the time. The Court of Chancery trial will be presided over by Judge Kathaleen McCormick.
The plaintiffs—comprising individual investors and union pension funds such as California’s State Teachers’ Retirement System—now face the challenging task of proving what is often regarded as the most difficult claim in corporate law: demonstrating that the directors completely failed in their duty of oversight. Legal experts note that this appears to be the first trial centered on such a claim.
Zuckerberg and Sandberg are accused of deliberately causing the company to break the law. Although Delaware law shields directors and officers from liability for poor business decisions, it offers no protection when those decisions involve illegal actions, regardless of any profits gained.
The defendants asserted in court filings that the plaintiffs are unable to provide sufficient evidence.
In pretrial court documents, the shareholders claimed they can demonstrate that following the 2012 agreement, Facebook persisted in deceptive privacy practices under Zuckerberg’s direction. The defendants countered that the evidence will reveal the company established a dedicated privacy oversight team, engaged an external compliance firm, and that Facebook itself was a victim of Cambridge Analytica’s deliberate misconduct.
Beyond the core privacy allegations, the plaintiffs claim that as Zuckerberg became aware of the impending Cambridge Analytica scandal—which threatened to depress the company’s stock price—he was motivated to sell shares, reportedly earning at least $1 billion in profits. The defendants argue that evidence will demonstrate he followed a pre-established stock-trading plan designed to shield him from insider trading accusations, and that his actions were intended to support his charitable endeavors.
