Latest Developments in Social Media Addiction Litigation

Bookmark this page for the most up-to-date news on the evolving legal landscape of social media addiction litigation. We’ll keep you informed about key developments, case filings, and legal strategies, helping you stay ahead of the curve and effectively represent your clients in this emerging area of law. A significant recent development is the selection of “bellwether” cases in the Multi-District Litigation (MDL) — these are test cases intended to help guide the resolution of hundreds of similar lawsuits.

Social Media Giants Face Claims They Harmed Children in California Bellwether Trial

The first bellwether trial to proceed involving social media addiction began jury selection in Los Angeles Superior Court on January 27. The 19-year-old plaintiff, identified only as K.G.M., contends that her addiction to social media that began when she was six years old has resulted in mental health problems.  Defendant Snap Inc. settled in principle on January 20, while TikTok settled out of the case late on January 26, leaving Meta Platforms, owner of Facebook and Instagram, and Google which owns YouTube, as defendants. There are approximately 1000 additional personal injury cases that have been consolidated in the Judicial Council Coordination Proceedings (JCCP) pending in Los Angeles and presided over by Judge Caroln B. Kuhl.

One of the key issues to be determined is whether companies such as Meta and Google deliberately designed their platforms to addict young users, resulting in a surging mental health crisis among the children who use them. Plaintiffs allege that certain features such as frequent notifications, infinite scroll and algorithms designed to feed content to viewers have been engineered to make the apps virtually impossible for their users to put down; they also claim that the companies specifically targeted minors, maximizing engagement that drove advertising revenue to the defendants. The resulting addiction to the platforms has resulted in widespread mental health problems among users, including depression, self-harm and suicide.

The defendants argue that no links between social media usage and mental health issues have been established; they also cite the First Amendment, contending that the decisions the companies make regarding their content constitute free speech. In a statement made by Meta addressing the pending lawsuits, Meta states:

“These lawsuits misportray our company and the work we do every day to provide young people with safe, valuable experiences online. Striking a balance between allowing teens to access the benefits of social media while keeping them safe is one of the most critical questions across our industry. We have listened to parents, researched the issues that matter most, and made real changes to protect teens online.”

Another challenge facing the plaintiffs has been defendants’ reliance on the position that their platforms are covered by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, a law that shields internet companies from liability for content created by third party users; in response, plaintiffs respond that they are not focused on the third party content but rather on the addictive design features built into the platforms themselves.

The California trial is expected to last several weeks with key figures such as Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Meta, and Adam Mosseri, head of Instagram, expected to testify. A separate group of federal cases consolidated in the multidistrict litigation pending in the Northern District of California and managed by U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers involves thousands of personal injury plaintiffs, school districts, attorneys general and Native American tribes. The first bellwether case in that litigation is expected to go to trial in the summer of 2026.

Litigation continues against social media platforms like Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, YouTube, and Snapchat, alleging they contribute to mental health problems in young users. Plaintiffs, including individuals, local governments, and school districts, claim these companies knowingly designed addictive features, especially targeting adolescents. These lawsuits are proceeding in both federal and state courts across the United States.

Six cases from school districts in Maryland, Georgia, Kentucky, New Jersey, South Carolina and Arizona have been selected as bellwether in the social media addiction MDL, three from the group selected by the plaintiffs and three from the defense submissions.  On Friday, June 13, the judge presiding over the litigation, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, of the Northern Districty of California, chose the cases out of the hundreds of plaintiffs who have filed suit against YouTube LLC, Meta Platforms Inc., Facebook and Instagram, alleging that the defendants’ platforms are specifically designed to be addictive, resulting in damages to their minor users. 

In her selections, Judge Gonzalez focused on trials that reflected communities with diverse demographics and socioeconomic backgrounds in an effort to ensure the results could serve as guides to the strength of the remaining plaintiffs and be relevant to any future negotiations. 

 The defendants sought to have a number of the plaintiffs excluded on statute of limitations grounds but the judge declined to rule on any statute issues, advising defense counsel that they could move for summary judgment later in the proceedings.  

Nearly 600 federal cases involving social media addiction were consolidated in October, 2022, into a social media addiction MDL (multidistrict litigation) pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California; they are being managed by U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers.  

Another group of over 800 social media litigation cases have been consolidated as Judicial Council Coordination Proceedings (JCCP) in California’s Los Angeles Superior Court before Superior Court Judge Carolyn B. Kuhl.

If your class action law firm needs outsourced case management services, contact Verus to discuss our class action support services.

On the Federal court website created for MDL 3047, In re: Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Liability Litigation, the court describes the litigation:

This is a Multi-District Litigation (MDL) involving various defendants such as Meta Platforms, Inc., Instagram LLC, Snap, Inc., TikTok, Inc., ByteDance, Inc., YouTube LLC, Google LLC, and Alphabet Inc. Plaintiffs have alleged that the defendants’ social media platforms are defective because they are designed to maximize screen time, which can encourage addictive behavior in adolescents.  As alleged, this conduct results in various emotional and physical harms, including death.

The Master Complaint filed in Los Angeles Superior Court makes similar claims, alleging that social media companies deliberately embedded addictive features in their products, exploiting the vulnerability of children and adolescents for profit, mirroring tactics used by the gambling and tobacco industries.

• In the past decade, Americans’ engagement with social media grew exponentially, nowhere more dramatically than among our country’s youth. That explosion in usage is no accident. It is the result of Defendants’ studied efforts to induce young people to compulsively use their products—Instagram, Facebook, TikTok, Snapchat, and YouTube. Borrowing heavily from the behavioral and neurobiological techniques used by slot machines and exploited by the cigarette industry, Defendants deliberately embedded in their products an array of design features aimed at maximizing youth engagement to drive advertising revenue. Defendants know children are in a developmental stage that leaves them particularly vulnerable to the addictive effects of these features. Defendants target them anyway, in pursuit of additional profit.

Plaintiffs in both the federal and state cases have alleged that, as a result of them using the defendants’’ platforms, they suffer from a range of injuries including depression, eating disorders, addiction, insomnia, anxiety, and self-harm, including suicide. 

Defendants in the social media addiction cases have presented a number of arguments, including the contention that under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, they are not responsible for the content posted on their platforms by their users. 

On October 13, 2023, Judge Kuhl ruled against the social media companies in the JCCP cases, finding that although the platforms are not products, the claims brought by the plaintiffs are not barred by either the First Amendment or Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. In siding with the plaintiffs, Judge Kuhl determined that their claims that the use of social media by teenagers caused addiction and mental health problems could move forward. Plaintiffs are also alleging that the social media giants intentionally manipulate the ways in which users engage with the platforms and failed to warn users about the risks inherent in their use, exhibiting disregard for their health and safety.

Similarly, in November 2023, Judge Rogers ordered that Meta and the other defendant social media companies would have to face negligence claims brought by plaintiffs in the MDL, rejecting the companies’ argument that they were protected by Section 230 and the First Amendment. In April 2024, the defendant Meta filed another motion to dismiss claims being made by over 30 U.S. states based in part on Section 230. Last week, Judge Rogers denied the motion for the most part, but placed limits on the states’ claims acknowledging that Section 230 does offer some protection to the social media company. 

The first social media addiction bellwether case is anticipated in June, 2025.

The former U.S. Surgeon General, Dr. Vivek Murthy, issued a health advisory highlighting the significant mental health risks of social media for children and adolescents. The advisory emphasized the widespread use of social media among youth, with up to 95% of 13-17 year olds using a platform and over a third using social media “almost constantly”. The report detailed the detrimental effects, including increased risk of depression and anxiety, especially for girls, sleep problems, online harassment, poor body image, and addiction. It called for urgent action from policymakers, tech companies, researchers, families, and young people to address this “national youth mental health crisis.”

The Supreme Court heard arguments in Gonzalez v. Google and Twitter v. Taamneh, addressing the scope of Section 230 protections. Gonzalez focused on algorithmic content promotion and whether it constitutes speech distinct from user-generated content. Taamneh addressed platforms’ responsibility for failing to remove terrorist content. These cases could significantly impact the legal landscape of the internet and social media platforms’ liability. The Court expressed skepticism about altering the status quo and raised concerns about a potential surge in litigation. Section 230 is also relevant to lawsuits alleging social media platforms target vulnerable adolescents with harmful content.

Judge Rogers approved the leadership team for MDL 3047, including co-lead and liaison counsel, and a plaintiffs’ steering committee. Previously, Meta requested consolidation of social media addiction lawsuits, arguing content is not a “product” and invoking Section 230. Other companies like TikTok opposed consolidation. Plaintiffs also requested JPML consolidation of cases, arguing similar claims against social media companies for addictive design and failure to warn about risks. These consolidated actions and leadership appointments mark a significant step in the litigation process.

State attorneys general are investigating social media platforms like TikTok, Facebook, Instagram, and Snapchat for potential violations of children’s safety and privacy protections, including the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). Concerns include manipulation of children, promotion of harmful content, and knowledge of these risks. Lawmakers are also proposing legislation to hold social media companies accountable for addiction and harm to children, such as California’s A.B. 2408. Groups like the Social Media Victims Law Center are pursuing litigation to raise awareness and advocate for consumer safety. Recent settlements, like the one with TikTok for COPPA violations, demonstrate the ongoing legal challenges facing social media companies.

Navigating the complexities of MDL 3047 and other social media addiction litigation requires experienced support. Verus offers specialized case management services for multi-district litigation, ensuring efficient and compliant handling of your cases.