by Christopher Hoffman/Associated Press
Fri, July 18th 2025 at 9:00 AM
Updated Fri, July 18th 2025 at 10:51 AM
FILE – Reggie Daniels pays his respects a memorial at Robb Elementary School, June 9, 2022, in Uvalde, Texas, created to honor the victims killed in the school shooting. The former Uvalde schools police chief and another former officer have been indicted over their role in the slow police response to the 2022 massacre in a Texas elementary school that left 19 children and two teachers dead, according to multiple reports Thursday, June 27, 2024. (AP Photo/Eric Gay, File)
LOS ANGELES — A critical hearing will be held at 10 a.m. today in Los Angeles Superior Court, where a judge could decide whether lawsuits against tech and gaming giants Meta and Activision move forward in connection to the 2022 Robb Elementary School shooting in Uvalde.
Attorneys for the victims’ families argue that Call of Duty and Instagram played a role in shaping the 18-year-old gunman’s actions, claiming the video game conditioned him to use real-world weapons and that Instagram introduced him to marketing and information about the rifle used in the shooting.
The lawsuits accuse Meta of failing to enforce its own policies meant to limit gun-related content and advertising to minors, allowing companies like Daniel Defense to promote AR-style rifles on Instagram. The families also allege Call of Duty, made by Activision, featured a virtual version of the same rifle, which they say allowed the gunman to become familiar with it through repeated gameplay.
“Instagram showed him the weapon. Call of Duty trained him to use it. Daniel Defense gave him the gun,” said Josh Koskoff, attorney for the families.
The lawsuit names all three companies — Activision, Meta Platforms, and Daniel Defense — as defendants in claims of negligence, aiding and abetting, and wrongful death.
Activision and Meta have filed motions to dismiss, citing First Amendment protections. Activision argues that Call of Duty is protected artistic expression. Meta points to longstanding federal law shielding platforms from liability for third-party content.
Activision called the shooting “horrendous and heartbreaking,” but defended its product, noting millions play without committing violence. A video game industry group also pushed back against the accusations, stating there is “no credible evidence” linking video games to real-world shootings.
Families behind the suit are expected to travel from Uvalde to California to attend the hearing. They’re seeking accountability from what they call a “three-headed monster” of platforms and marketing that they say shaped the gunman’s path.
The case could mark a pivotal test of how courts handle the intersection of online influence, marketing, and real-world violence.
Whether the lawsuit proceeds will depend on the outcome of Friday’s hearing in downtown Los Angeles.
