Pivotal Social Media Addiction Trial Opens in California as Nationwide Litigation Against Tech Giants Intensifies

By LP News Editor, Sara G. Stephens

A closely watched legal battle against major social media platforms begins this week in California. The trial marks the first time companies such as Meta, TikTok, and YouTube must defend themselves before a jury over allegations that their products are addictive and harmful to young users’ mental health. Jury selection will kick off Tuesday in Los Angeles County Superior Court in a pivotal bellwether trial that could shape the future of social media accountability litigation nationwide.

The case was brought by a 19-year-old California woman and her mother. Claimants allege that years of compulsive social media use fueled depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation. The lawsuit alleges that the platforms used addictive design features such as infinite scroll, autoplay video, algorithmic content recommendations, and push notifications that kept young users engaged for extended periods.

Tech companies allegedly used these features despite internal knowledge of potential harm to adolescent mental health.

A Bellwether Case With National Implications

The trial is one of several bellwether cases selected from a growing pool of lawsuits accusing social media companies of prioritizing engagement and profit over user safety. Bellwether trials are designed to test legal theories and evidence before juries, offering insight into how similar claims may fare as litigation expands across state and federal courts.

Thousands of related lawsuits are pending nationwide, including claims filed by parents, young adults, and public school districts. Plaintiffs allege that addictive platform design has contributed to a surge in youth mental health problems, including depression, self harm, eating disorders, and anxiety.

Levin Papantonio shareholder Emmie Paulos participated in a Voices United in Education podcast last week talking about the need for schools to hold social media companies accountable for the negative outcomes resulting from this growing social media addiction crisis.

In November 2023, Levin Papantonio announced that it had filed a lawsuit against major social media companies on behalf of the Escambia County, Florida, School Board. “These social media companies are profiting by exploiting and addicting the children of Escambia County, creating a youth mental crisis, and forcing schools to pick up the cost,” said Paulos, who filed the social media lawsuit on behalf of the School Board of Escambia County.

Paulos serves on the Plaintiffs’ Steering Committee, a court-appointed leadership group responsible for coordinating discovery, shaping legal strategy, and advancing the cases toward trial.

Snap Reaches Settlement Ahead of Trial

Just days before jury selection began, Snap Inc., the parent company of Snapchat, reached a confidential settlement with the plaintiff in the California case, avoiding a jury trial of its own. The settlement was announced shortly before Snap executives, including CEO Evan Spiegel, were expected to testify.

Other defendants did not settle and are expected to contest the claims. Executives from Meta, TikTok’s parent company ByteDance, and Alphabet, the parent company of YouTube, are expected to testify as the trial unfolds over the coming weeks.

Federal MDL Advances in Northern California

While the California state court trial garners national attention, a parallel legal battle is advancing in federal court. In the Northern District of California, more than 2,000 lawsuits have been consolidated into a multidistrict litigation known as MDL No. 3047. The federal cases raise similar allegations of defective product design and failure to warn, focusing on how platform features allegedly exploit psychological vulnerabilities in young users.

Unlike claims based on user-generated content, many of these cases focus on platform architecture and design choices. Courts have allowed several of these design-based claims to proceed, rejecting early efforts by defendants to dismiss them under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.

What’s at Stake

Plaintiffs say the litigation is about more than financial compensation. They argue it is about accountability, transparency, and forcing meaningful changes in how social media platforms are designed and marketed to children and teenagers.

“This litigation is fundamentally about responsibility,” Paulos said. “For years, these companies knew their platforms were pulling kids into cycles of compulsive use, yet they continued to optimize for engagement at any cost. What is at stake here is whether corporations that shape the daily lives of millions of young people can be held accountable when their design choices cause real and lasting harm.”

Paulos compares the social media lawsuits to earlier waves of litigation against the tobacco and opioid industries, where internal documents ultimately played a key role in establishing knowledge of addiction risks. Plaintiffs in the social media cases argue that similar evidence will demonstrate that platform executives were aware of youth mental health dangers while continuing to deploy addictive features.

A Legal Reckoning Takes Shape

The outcome of the California bellwether trial could influence settlement negotiations and trial strategies in courts across the country. A verdict favoring the plaintiff may accelerate additional trials in both state coordinated proceedings and the federal MDL. It could also increase pressure on lawmakers and regulators to impose new safeguards.

As jurors begin hearing testimony this week, the case represents a critical test of whether traditional product liability and negligence laws can be applied to modern technology platforms. For families, schools, and communities grappling with the fallout of youth mental health crises, the trial marks a long-anticipated step toward accountability for an industry that has largely operated beyond the reach of courtroom scrutiny.