Chicago
Case Types We Handle
Personal Injuries
Car Accidents
Truck Accidents
Motorcycle Accidents
Bicycle Accidents
Construction Accidents
Nursing Home Abuse
Wrongful Death
Slip and Fall Accidents
Daycare Injury & Abuse
Edwardsville
Case Types We Handle
Personal Injuries
Car Accidents
Truck Accidents
Motorcycle Accidents
Bicycle Accidents
Nursing Home Abuse
Wrongful Death
Slip and Fall Accidents
Daycare Injury & Abuse
Premises Liability
St. Louis
Case Types We Handle
Personal Injuries
Car Accidents
Truck Accidents
Motorcycle Accidents
Bicycle Accidents
Construction Accidents
Nursing Home Abuse
Wrongful Death
Slip and Fall Accidents
Daycare Injury & Abuse
Dangerous Drugs
Defective Products
Chemical Exposure

Do I Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit?

Use the chat feature on this page to find out if you qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit.

Contact TorHoerman Law for a free consultation.

Most Recent Updates:

  • There are currently more than 2,300 lawsuits pending in the Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation.

  • Social Media Lawsuits allege that excessive social media use contributes to mental health issues in teenagers and young adults through the promotion of addictive behaviors and failure to shield users from harmful content.

  • Lawsuits claim that social media companies were aware of the negative impacts of their products but did not take sufficient measures to address these issues.

Social Media Addiction Lawsuit Filed Against Social Media Platforms for Mental Health Problems in Young Users

Do you qualify for the social media addiction lawsuit?

The Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation (MDL 3047) accuses major social media companies of designing platforms that contribute to a growing youth mental health crisis, fostering compulsive use linked to eating disorders, self-harm, and other mental health disorders among young people.

Families across the country are filing social media lawsuit claims alleging that these platforms exploited addictive algorithms and harmful design features that damage users’ well-being and self-esteem.

Many victims report developing anxiety, depression, and body image issues after prolonged exposure to curated feeds and endless scrolling.

TorHoerman Law is actively reviewing new claims and helping families pursue justice for the harm caused by social media addiction.

Damages and Potential Compensation in Social Media Addiction Cases; Do I Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit_ - TorHoerman Law_ Investigating the Social Media Lawsuit - torhoerman law

Social Media Addiction Lawsuit: Who Qualifies, Recent Updates, and What to Expect

The social media harm lawsuits allege that major social media giants like Meta (Instagram and Facebook), TikTok, Snapchat, and YouTube prioritized engagement and profit over safety, creating products that harm children’s mental health and exploit developing brains.

These claims, now consolidated in the Social Media MDL, argue that features such as endless scrolling, algorithmic recommendations, and constant notifications have fueled excessive social media use among minors.

Families and school districts contend that these design choices have contributed to anxiety, depression, self-harm, and other serious mental health issues in children and teens.

Plaintiffs claim the companies knew about these risks yet failed to implement safeguards or warn users about potential harm.

The social media addiction litigation aims to hold these corporations accountable for their failure to protect young users’ mental health and the widespread damage caused by addictive platform design.

As the litigation expands, courts are beginning to address questions of responsibility, product design, and corporate negligence.

TorHoerman Law is closely following the MDL’s progress and actively representing families and communities seeking justice for the harm caused by social media addiction.

If you or a loved one has experienced depression, anxiety, self-harm, or other serious mental health effects linked to excessive social media use, you may qualify to take legal action and join others filing social media addiction lawsuits.

Contact a social media addiction lawyer from TorHoerman Law today for a free consultation.

You can also use the confidential chat feature on this page for an instant case evaluation to find out if you qualify to file a social media addiction lawsuit instantly.

Table of Contents

Lawsuit Updates

February 26, 2026

February 26th, 2026:  Plaintiff Testimony Highlights Harms in Los Angeles Social Media Addiction Trial

The plaintiff in the Los Angeles social media addiction trial testified about her experiences using Instagram and YouTube as a minor, describing what she characterized as compulsive use and worsening mental health.

She told jurors that she began using the platforms at a young age and gradually became preoccupied with checking notifications, posting photos, and monitoring likes and comments.

According to her testimony, she felt pressure to present a curated image online and frequently compared herself to other users, which she said contributed to anxiety, depression, and body image issues.

She testified that she would check her accounts repeatedly throughout the day and late into the night, disrupting her sleep and affecting her mood.

The plaintiff described feeling distress when posts did not receive expected engagement and said that features such as beauty filters and algorithm-driven content recommendations amplified her insecurities.

She also stated that despite periods where she recognized the platforms were negatively affecting her, she found it difficult to disengage.

Defense attorneys have argued that the platforms provide tools that allow users to limit notifications and screen time, and they have questioned whether the plaintiff’s mental health challenges can be attributed directly to social media use.

The trial remains ongoing in Los Angeles Superior Court.

February 26, 2026
February 25, 2026

February 25th, 2026:  NCMEC Executive Testifies on Encryption and Reporting in New Mexico Trial Against Meta

Testimony in the New Mexico attorney general’s trial against Meta this week focused on the company’s implementation of end-to-end encryption and its impact on reporting suspected child exploitation activity.

An executive from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children testified by video deposition that Meta’s encryption changes reduced the volume and quality of reports submitted to the organization’s CyberTipline.

The state alleges that Meta deceived the public about risks posed to teens on Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Messenger, including exposure to sexual predation and harmful design features.

According to the witness, NCMEC raised concerns with Meta, including in meetings with senior leadership, before the rollout of enhanced encryption in Messenger.

She testified that after encryption was implemented, the organization saw a decline in reports originating from Facebook and expressed concern that encrypted systems can limit a platform’s ability to detect and report abusive conduct.

However, on cross examination, the witness acknowledged that part of the reported decline was attributable to changes in how Facebook grouped or bundled certain reports together.

She also agreed that decisions about what content to report ultimately rest with the platform.

The jury also viewed the conclusion of cross examination of an addiction expert and the beginning of testimony from a computer science and digital forensics expert.

That expert is expected to opine that Meta’s safety tools were delayed or deprioritized and that detection systems were insufficient.

Defense counsel has previously emphasized that Meta provides user disclosures about objectionable content and has implemented safeguards, arguing that warnings and moderation efforts reflect proactive measures rather than deception.

February 25, 2026
February 24, 2026

February 24th, 2026: Addiction Expert Testifies in New Mexico AG’s Trial Against Meta

An addiction medicine specialist testified in New Mexico state courtin the attorney general’s case alleging that Meta’s Facebook and Instagram platforms harm teen mental health and misrepresent associated risks.

The lawsuit claims the company failed to protect minors from harmful content, predatory conduct, and allegedly addictive design features, while misleading the public about those risks.

The expert, a Stanford physician specializing in addiction medicine, testified that teenagers are uniquely vulnerable to compulsive social media use due to developmental factors, including heightened sensitivity to peer validation and ongoing brain development.

She described social media platforms as reinforcing behavior in a manner that can resemble addiction patterns, including tolerance, withdrawal-like symptoms, and difficulty disengaging despite diminished enjoyment.

According to the testimony, some adolescents in clinical settings report extremely high daily usage levels.

The expert opined that, over time, social media addiction may be formally recognized as a distinct diagnosis in psychiatric classification systems.

On cross-examination, defense counsel challenged both the scientific framing of social media as an addiction and the expert’s comparisons between platform use and substance abuse.

The defense also referenced public health advisories acknowledging both potential risks and potential benefits of social media use.

The expert maintained that her testimony reflects peer-reviewed research and clinical experience, and denied overstating conclusions.

The case follows similar claims litigated in California and in federal multidistrict proceedings, where plaintiffs allege design defect and failure-to-warn theories centered on engagement-driven features.

In opening statements, defense counsel emphasized that Meta provides disclosures about potential exposure to objectionable content and has implemented safety measures, arguing that the company has not deceived users about risks.

As the New Mexico trial continues, the court will evaluate competing expert testimony regarding causation, foreseeability, and the scope of any duty owed to teen users.

February 24, 2026
February 20, 2026

February 20th, 2026: Former Meta Executive Testifies on Algorithms and Safety in California Bellwether Trial

A former Meta vice president testified before a California jury in the ongoing social media bellwether trial, stating that he left the company due to concerns about safety prioritization and the increasing complexity of its algorithms. The testimony comes as part of a closely watched proceeding testing claims that Instagram and YouTube harmed a young user’s mental health through allegedly addictive design features.

The former executive, who worked at Meta from 2009 to 2020, described the company’s recommendation systems as highly sophisticated and continuously optimized to pursue engagement goals. He analogized the algorithm to a bookstore that reorganizes itself in real time based on user preferences, becoming more refined as user behavior generates additional data. He characterized the systems as relentless in pursuing defined objectives, without embedded moral considerations.

He further testified that, in his experience, product and growth teams focused heavily on metrics such as usage and revenue, while safety teams operated separately. When asked whether algorithms were tested for safety before deployment, he stated that he did not personally observe such testing during his tenure.

The testimony followed a full day of testimony from Meta’s CEO, who told the jury that current scientific literature does not establish a causal link between social media use and worsening teen mental health. He also disputed suggestions that the company targets minors or prioritizes engagement at the expense of safety. Instagram’s CEO previously testified that he does not consider social media addiction to be a clinically established condition.

On cross examination, the former executive acknowledged that he did not report directly to the CEO, has no direct knowledge of the company’s safety practices since leaving in 2020, and does not possess professional expertise in adolescent mental health. He also confirmed that his concerns at the time were not specifically focused on teen mental health issues. When challenged on his understanding of algorithm mechanics, he maintained that his experience explaining the systems to advertisers provided him with meaningful insight.

February 20, 2026
February 19, 2026

February 19th, 2026:  Federal Court Admits School District Experts as Zuckerberg Testifies in California Social Media Bellwether Trial

Two significant developments occurred this week in the coordinated social media addiction litigation landscape, affecting both the federal school district MDL and the high-profile California bellwether trial involving youth mental health claims.

In the federal multidistrict litigation brought by school districts, a California judge denied motions by Meta, TikTok, Google, and Snapchat seeking to exclude six expert witnesses ahead of the first bellwether trial scheduled for June.

The experts are expected to testify regarding alleged classroom disruption, teacher time diversion, school mental health impacts, and economic damages tied to student social media use.

The court largely held that defendants’ challenges go to weight rather than admissibility, noting that concerns about generalized “social media” references, survey methodology, and cost calculations can be addressed through cross-examination.

The judge did, however, indicate that portions of one expert’s opinions may be limited where they stray outside his expertise.

At the same time, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg took the stand in the first California state bellwether personal injury trial, marking the first time he has testified before a jury evaluating alleged harm caused by Instagram and Facebook.

Zuckerberg testified that his understanding of the current scientific literature is that there is no established causal link between social media use and worsening teen mental health.

He stated that Meta considers multiple viewpoints and research sources when evaluating platform policies, including the use of features such as beauty filters.

During direct examination, plaintiff’s counsel challenged Zuckerberg by presenting internal company documents and questioning whether Meta had long been aware of the risks to minors.

Zuckerberg disputed the characterization, explaining that internal documents reflect competing perspectives rather than definitive conclusions.

He also testified that Meta does not target teens for profit and claimed teens represent a minimal share of Instagram’s revenue.

Zuckerberg further addressed internal discussions about increasing time spent on the platform, maintaining that while engagement metrics are monitored, they are not framed as formal “goals” as plaintiffs suggest.

He also acknowledged that Meta is aware that some children under 13 access Instagram, but testified that the company attempts to detect and remove such accounts and has worked to improve age-verification measures.

Both developments highlight the continued progression of these cases toward trial, with courts allowing plaintiffs to present broad expert testimony while defendants prepare to challenge causation and damages theories through cross-examination and competing evidence.

Although plaintiffs may view these rulings and testimony as momentum, significant legal and factual issues remain unresolved, and the litigation is still far from any final outcome or comprehensive resolution.

February 19, 2026
February 18, 2026

February 18th, 2026: Social Media Addiction Bellwether Trial Briefly Paused Ahead of Zuckerberg Testimony

The first California bellwether trial involving claims that social media platforms harmed a young user’s mental health was temporarily delayed after a seated juror was hospitalized with an illness.

The Los Angeles Superior Court judge overseeing the case indicated the proceedings will resume the following day, with Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg scheduled to testify.

The delay was agreed to by counsel for the plaintiff, Meta, and Google, with the parties opting to allow the juror time to recover rather than immediately replacing him with an alternate.

The court noted that six alternates remain available, and the parties agreed the juror will be replaced if he is unable to return when trial resumes.

The brief interruption is the latest in a series of logistical disruptions in the highly watched proceeding, which has already faced delays during jury selection due to attorney illness and courthouse facility issues.

Despite these setbacks, plaintiff’s counsel represented to the court that the trial remains on schedule and that witnesses can be adjusted to accommodate the delay.

February 18, 2026
February 17, 2026

February 17th, 2026: Expert Testimony on Social Media Addiction Presented in California Bellwether Trial

A Stanford University professor of psychiatry and addiction medicine returned to the witness stand in the ongoing California bellwether trial examining claims that social media platforms harmed a young user’s mental health.

The case is one of several coordinated proceedings testing allegations that certain platform design features are addictive and contributed to psychological injuries.

The plaintiff’s expert testified that peer reviewed studies support the concept of social media addiction and that heavy use may contribute to or worsen symptoms such as depression, anxiety, insomnia, and suicidal ideation in minors.

She referenced a large National Institutes of Health funded study tracking more than 11,000 youth, which she said found that higher levels of social media use were associated with later onset of depressive symptoms among participants who were not initially depressed.

The companies dispute the addiction characterization.

Earlier in the trial, Instagram’s CEO testified that he does not believe social media addiction is a clinically established condition.

Defense counsel also challenged the expert’s framework, questioning whether she oversimplifies addiction concepts and probing whether platform features such as notifications and autoplay are easily disabled by users.

The expert acknowledged she did not focus on how to deactivate features, but maintained her opinions center on the alleged addictive design elements rather than user settings.

The trial has been narrowed by prior court rulings to focus on alleged design defects and failure to warn theories, rather than liability for third party content posted on the platforms.

The plaintiff, now an adult, alleges that compulsive use of social media beginning in childhood contributed to mental health issues.

This bellwether proceeding is one of several planned trials intended to test liability theories in the broader coordinated litigation involving thousands of claims.

While expert testimony regarding addiction may shape how juries evaluate foreseeability and causation, significant legal and factual issues remain to be resolved as the case continues.

February 17, 2026
February 16, 2026

February 16th, 2026: Landmark trial accusing tech giants of harming children with addictive social media begins

Opening day has arrived in a high-profile federal lawsuit alleging that major social media companies designed their platforms in ways that are addictive and harmful to children’s mental health, marking a key moment in emerging litigation over tech’s role in youth well-being. The case, closely watched by legal and policy communities, centers on claims that platforms knowingly incorporated design features that promote compulsive use among young users, contributing to anxiety, depression, and other psychological harms.

Plaintiffs allege that features such as infinite scrolling, personalized algorithms, and persistent notifications were engineered to maximize engagement and that companies failed to implement reasonable safeguards or to warn parents and caregivers about foreseeable risks. These claims are being tested in court as part of broader theories seeking to hold tech companies accountable under negligence, product liability, and failure-to-warn doctrines.

Defense teams counter that existing evidence does not demonstrate legally actionable addiction caused by platform design and that users ultimately make choices about how they engage with social media. They also highlight positive uses of social platforms for connection, information, and community.

The start of this trial represents a significant procedural milestone in social media litigation and could influence other cases claiming that digital products contribute to harm in children. Judges and juries will be asked to weigh complex technical evidence about how social media systems operate, how they affect behavioral patterns, and whether companies knew or should have known of harmful impacts on minors.

As evidence unfolds, the outcome may shape future arguments on duty of care, foreseeability of harm, and product design in litigation involving digital technologies. This trial also adds momentum to parallel federal and state claims nationwide that raise similar questions about corporate responsibility and the legal standards for technology that interacts with vulnerable populations.

February 16, 2026
February 12, 2026

February 12, 2026: ​​Judge Questions Meta’s Push to Rein In Arbitration Demands as First MDL Trial Nears

U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers questioned whether she has jurisdiction to intervene in newly filed arbitration demands a gainst Meta, pushing back on the company’s request to force plaintiffs’ firms to bring those claims into the social media addiction MDL.

At a Wednesday hearing, the judge noted that Meta drafted the arbitration provision in its Instagram terms and commented that companies often insist on arbitration until they object to its outcome.

The dispute stems from nine arbitration demands filed last month on behalf of young Instagram users, along with threats of mass arbitration involving up to 175,000 claimants.

Meta argued that the claims overlap with the MDL and should be covered by the court’s common benefit order.

Plaintiffs’ counsel agreed to meet and confer but insisted that any disputes regarding the arbitration demands must first be resolved through arbitration.

The judge instructed counsel to coordinate but expressed doubt that she could manage proceedings outside the MDL.

The hearing is scheduled for days after the court rejected summary judgment for a Kentucky school district on its public nuisance and negligence claims, paving the way for the first federal bellwether trial, scheduled for June 15.

The judge is now considering whether to bifurcate that trial to handle punitive damages separately and has outlined a tentative August trial involving 29 state attorneys general pursuing privacy and consumer protection claims against Meta.

She also indicated she is willing to allow a jury to hear the state’s claims if permitted by law.

February 12, 2026
February 11, 2026

February 11th, 2026: New Mexico Trial Examines Safety Practices in Social Media Mental Health Lawsuit

A former Facebook safety executive testified in a New Mexico trial that safety proposals inside Meta faced increasing resistance.

The testimony occurred in a lawsuit filed by the New Mexico attorney general that alleges Meta misled the public about mental health risks to teenagers using Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, and Messenger.

The social media mental health lawsuit centers on claims that Meta allowed children under 13 to join platforms and failed to protect teenagers from sexual exploitation, harassment, and addictive platform design.

The New Mexico attorney general alleges the conduct violates the state’s Unfair Practices Act, a consumer protection law that prohibits deceptive business practices.

Former Facebook engineering director Arturo Béjar told jurors that safety teams lost influence after 2015 when Meta reorganized internal leadership.

Béjar said safety initiatives required approval from non-safety teams focused on user growth and engagement.

Béjar testified that proposed safety tools were weakened or rejected during internal review.

One proposed tool would have allowed teenagers to explain why they blocked another user, including reporting suspected impersonation. Béjar said Meta never implemented the feature.

Béjar also described internal research indicating low reporting rates of harmful interactions.

Béjar testified that only 100 out of 10,000 harmful interactions were reported, and only two resulted in content removal.

Béjar said many interactions caused distress without violating removal standards, leaving teenagers without effective reporting tools.

The New Mexico attorney general contrasted Béjar’s survey results with Meta’s public transparency reports.

Béjar said 16.3% of young survey participants reported exposure to inappropriate sexual images.

Opening statements referenced Meta enforcement data showing a much lower rate of 0.02%.

Meta’s defense argues that the company discloses risks and uses automated systems to identify underage users.

Defense counsel stated that teen accounts are assigned default safety settings and that public reporting tools exist to flag suspected underage accounts.

Jurors are expected to hear testimony from Meta safety personnel later in the trial.

February 11, 2026
February 9, 2026

February 9th, 2026: Meta Child Safety Case Moves Toward Trial as Company Advances AI Expansion

A major child safety lawsuit against Meta is moving closer to trial, even as the company continues to expand its aggressive artificial intelligence infrastructure.

In the New Mexico state court, jury selection is underway in a case brought by the state attorney general, which alleges Meta failed to protect children from sexual exploitation and mental health harms on Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp.

The case is expected to last several weeks and centers on whether Meta ignored known risks to minors despite internal safety tools and reports

Meta denies liability and argues its safety measures and First Amendment protections shield it from responsibility.

The company is also appealing a prior ruling that resulted in a $425 million damages award, signaling that the litigation will likely extend well beyond this trial phase.

Courts have allowed the case to proceed while those appeals remain pending, reflecting judicial willingness to examine platform conduct rather than dismiss claims at the outset

At the same time, Meta announced a multi-year deal valued at up to $6 billion to expand its AI data center infrastructure in the United States.

This contrast has drawn attention in the litigation, as plaintiffs argue the company continues to prioritize growth and engagement technologies while safety failures involving children remain unresolved.

The case highlights a broader legal trend: courts are increasingly willing to scrutinize whether social media companies invested adequately in child protection relative to their scale and resources.

Why this matters:

This lawsuit could shape how courts evaluate platforms’ responsibility for child-safety harms, even when companies claim robust internal safeguards.

The outcome may influence future state-led enforcement actions and how social media companies balance rapid AI expansion against obligations to protect minors online.

February 9, 2026
February 8, 2026

February 8th, 2026: Jury Seated in First California Bellwether Trial Alleging Social Media Harm to Minors

A jury has been seated in Los Angeles Superior Court for the first California bellwether trial alleging that major social media platforms harmed a minor’s mental health. The case, brought by a plaintiff identified as K.G.M., targets Meta and Google, alleging that Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube were designed in ways that foster compulsive use and contributed to anxiety, depression, sleep disruption, and other psychological harms beginning when she was a child.

The trial is proceeding against Meta and Google after TikTok and Snap reached settlement agreements in this individual case. Those settlements do not resolve the broader coordinated proceedings, which involve approximately 1,000 consolidated personal injury cases pending before the same court.

Jury selection spanned nearly two weeks and involved questioning hundreds of potential jurors about their views on social media companies, personal platform usage, and potential biases. The final panel consists of 12 jurors and six alternates. The trial is expected to feature testimony from high profile executives, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, following a prior court ruling requiring certain corporate leaders to appear.

The plaintiff alleges that social media use beginning at age six contributed to mental health struggles and emotional distress. The claims focus on product design theories, including allegations that platforms incorporated features that encouraged prolonged engagement without adequate safeguards for young users.

This California bellwether trial runs parallel to federal multidistrict litigation in the Northern District of California, where parents, school districts, and state attorneys general assert similar claims that social media companies deliberately engineered addictive features harmful to minors. The outcome of this trial is expected to influence the trajectory of related litigation nationwide, particularly with respect to design defect, causation, and corporate knowledge of alleged risks.

February 8, 2026
February 7, 2026

February 7th, 2026: Opening Arguments Underway in Landmark Social Media Addiction Trial

Opening arguments have begun in a pivotal federal lawsuit seeking to hold major social media companies legally accountable for alleged addiction caused by their platforms. The trial, one of the first of its kind, centers on claims that companies engineered features designed to maximize user engagement in ways that foster compulsive use and harm mental health—especially among teens and young adults.

Plaintiffs in the case outlined their position to the jury, asserting that platform design elements such as endless scrolling, auto-play, and personalized recommendation algorithms were intentionally built to be habit-forming. They argue that these features contributed to addiction-like behaviors and that the companies failed to provide adequate safeguards or warnings to users and families about foreseeable risks.

Defense attorneys countered that users ultimately choose how they engage with social media and that technological benefits outweigh alleged harms. The defense also emphasized that current evidence does not establish a legally actionable addiction tied to platform design.

February 7, 2026
February 6, 2026

February 6th, 2026:  Federal Judge Clears Path for First School District Bellwether Trial in Social Media Addiction MDL

A California federal judge has denied summary judgment motions filed by several major social media companies, allowing the first school district bellwether trial in the social media addiction multidistrict litigation to proceed in June. The ruling permits negligence and public nuisance claims brought by the Breathitt County School District in Kentucky to move forward against Meta, Google, ByteDance, and Snap.

The school district alleges that the companies knowingly designed platforms with addictive features that foster compulsive use among minors and failed to implement adequate parental controls, age verification systems, screen time limitations, and other protective tools. According to the district, these design choices forced schools to divert substantial resources to address classroom disruptions, student mental health issues, and property damage linked to social media use.

In rejecting the companies’ defenses, the court found that there are genuine disputes of fact regarding whether the platforms’ design features were defective and whether they substantially contributed to the district’s alleged harms.

The judge also declined to dismiss the case under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, concluding that the claims center on product design rather than third party content. Statute of limitations arguments were likewise rejected, with the court noting that awareness of social media content does not equate to knowledge of allegedly defective product attributes.

The district claims damages including expenditures on monitoring tools, physical property damage, and millions of dollars in lost staff time spent addressing social media related issues. The court ruled that the district may pursue both monetary damages and injunctive relief.

The case is scheduled for jury selection in mid June, marking the first bellwether trial in the federal MDL consolidating claims by school districts, personal injury plaintiffs, attorneys general, and tribal entities.

February 6, 2026
February 5, 2026

February 5, 2026: Social Media Mental Health Lawsuit Jury Selection Delayed

Jury selection in the Social Media Mental Health Lawsuit has been postponed after defense counsel reported an illness that prevented participation in scheduled proceedings.

The presiding judge dismissed the pool of potential jurors who were expected to report during the week of the original start date. According to court scheduling updates, jury selection is expected to resume on Thursday.

The delay shifts the anticipated timeline for trial openings. The court had scheduled opening statements for Wednesday, February 4.

The revised schedule places completion of jury selection near the end of the week, with opening arguments projected to begin Monday, February 9. Court administrators have not indicated that the illness will cause long-term disruption to the trial calendar.

The Social Media Mental Health Lawsuit stands among the first large-scale jury trials testing claims that digital platform design can create foreseeable health risks.

Similar lawsuits have been consolidated in federal and state courts across the country.

February 5, 2026
February 4, 2026

February 4th, 2026: Massachusetts Judge Allows Continued Review of Health Claims Data in Instagram Addiction Suit

A Massachusetts Superior Court judge has ruled that the state attorney general may continue reviewing health insurance claims data obtained after the close of fact discovery in the state’s social media addiction lawsuit against Instagram.

The decision permits the state to rely on records subpoenaed from the Center for Health Information Analysis and the Massachusetts Health Policy Commission, despite Meta’s objections that the requests came too late in the discovery process.

Fact discovery in the case closed in May 2025, but the state sought the records in November and received them the following month.

The data consists of aggregated health insurance claims tied to nearly three dozen diagnosis codes that the state contends demonstrate the financial impact of an alleged rise in teen mental health issues linked to social media use.

Meta argued that the state is attempting to cure deficiencies in its case and should have identified the data earlier.

The company further asserted that allowing the materials would require it to reopen discovery and conduct additional depositions.

In his ruling, the court rejected Meta’s request to exclude the records but stated that Meta may depose representatives of the state agencies as necessary.

The court also postponed summary judgment arguments from May to June and allowed discovery to continue while awaiting a ruling from the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court on Meta’s contention that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act and the First Amendment bar the claims.

The attorney general’s office declined to comment on the order, and Meta has not publicly responded.

February 4, 2026
February 2, 2026

February 2nd, 2026: February 2026 JPML Update

The Social Media MDL added 81 cases between January and February, increasing from 2,243 to 2,324.

The rise reflects continued filings tied to youth mental health and platform design allegations.

The court remains focused on coordinated discovery and pretrial case management, with no new JPML activity reported.

If your child has suffered from social media addiction, mental health disorders, an eating disorder, or other health issues related to excessive social media use, you may be eligible to file a Social Media Mental Health Lawsuit.

Parents of teenage users who have tragically taken their own life as a result of mental health problems linked to social media usage may be eligible to file a wrongful death claim.

Contact TorHoerman Law for a free consultation or use the chatbot on this page to see if you qualify for legal action instantly.

February 2, 2026

Overview of the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit

Families, young people, and school districts have filed social media mental health lawsuits alleging that products from major social media platforms, including Instagram/Facebook (Meta Platforms), TikTok (ByteDance), Snapchat (Snap), and YouTube (Google/Alphabet), were designed to maximize engagement in ways that cause or worsen psychological or physical harm to minors.

Most lawsuit filings are now centralized in the social media multidistrict litigation filed in federal court: In re Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation (MDL No. 3047), pending before Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in the Northern District of California.

Do I Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit_ - Overview of the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit - torhoerman law

Generally, the social media addiction lawsuits allege:

  • Defective design: features like infinite scroll, autoplay, streaks, and algorithmic recommendations are unreasonably dangerous for minors and drive compulsive use.
  • Failure to warn / failure to protect: platforms knew or should have known about youth mental health risks but did not provide adequate warnings, age-appropriate defaults, or friction to reduce harm.
  • Negligence and negligence per se tied to child-safety and consumer statutes.
  • Public nuisance and violating consumer protection laws: for the costs shifted to schools and communities (counseling, supervision, crisis response).

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), “problematic social media use” among adolescents in Europe and parts of Central Asia and Canada rose from 7% in 2018 to 11% in 2022, prompting concern about social media’s impact on youth well-being.

These findings come from the WHO-affiliated HBSC study of nearly 280,000 students aged 11–15.

The U.S. Surgeon General reports that up to 95% of teens use social platforms, with more than one-third using them “almost constantly,” and has warned that social media is a likely driver of the growing mental health crisis in adolescents.

In 2024, the U.S. Surgeon General publicly called for a warning label on social media due to “significant mental health harms” in youth.

The American Psychological Association advises that exposure to content encouraging self-harm or eating-disordered behaviors should be minimized and promptly removed; the APA frames these steps as necessary to reduce risks of psychological or physical harm in adolescents.

U.S. usage data reinforce the scale of the problem: surveys show many teens describe their use as “almost constant,” with YouTube and TikTok leading overall time spent.

The Basis of the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit

Plaintiffs argue that these product-design choices foreseeably harm children’s mental health, particularly given developing brains and vulnerability to persuasive design.

The MDL court has allowed core theories (such as defective design and certain failure-to-warn claims) to move forward past early motions, while state and public-entity cases add pressure outside federal court.

Do I Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit_ - Overview of the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit - torhoerman law; Do I Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit_ - The Basis of the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit - torhoerman law

Together, these proceedings seek compensation for injuries (anxiety, depression, self-harm, eating disorders) and injunctive changes that better protect young users’ social media accounts.

Potential Social Media Addiction Lawsuit Settlement Amounts

While no settlements have yet been finalized in the social media mental-health litigation, the potential compensation range for individuals harmed by excessive use of major social media platforms may fall between several tiers depending on severity and proof of mental-health impact.

Projections are based on factors such as documented diagnoses of serious mental health disorders, eating disorders, self-harm behaviors, and the scope of excessive social media use or addiction.

The stronger the evidence linking a young person’s harm to social-media platform design or lack of safeguards, the higher the potential reward within these tiers.

TorHoerman Law encourages qualified families to consult promptly so those damages can be evaluated in the context of the ongoing multidistrict litigation.

Do I Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit_ - Overview of the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit - torhoerman law; Do I Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit_ - The Basis of the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit - torhoerman law; Potential Social Media Addiction Lawsuit Settlement Amounts

Potential social media addiction lawsuit settlement amounts:

  • Tier 1 (Severe Harm – Highest Value): Cases involving suicide attempts, wrongful-death claims, or life-altering psychological injury linked to social-media addiction. These cases could fall within the $500,000 – $2,000,000+ range depending on evidence and jurisdiction.
  • Tier 2 (Moderate to Severe Harm): Individuals diagnosed with serious mental-health disorders such as major depression, anxiety, or eating disorders requiring ongoing therapy or hospitalization. Estimated values may range between $100,000 – $500,000.
  • Tier 3 (Mild to Moderate Harm): Individuals who experienced documented anxiety, body-image issues, or other mental-health impacts that improved with treatment but still disrupted daily life. Estimated values may range between $25,000 – $100,000.

Disclaimer: These figures are speculative projections derived from current lawsuit data and previous mass-tort settlements.

Actual compensation will depend on individual circumstances, evidence of harm, and outcomes within the ongoing Social Media MDL.

Who Qualifies to File a Claim in the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit?

People filing claims in the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit include families, parents, and young adults who have suffered serious mental health consequences tied to their time spent online.

These lawsuits focus on individuals who developed depression, anxiety, eating disorders, or self-harm behaviors after years of compulsive social media use.

Many plaintiffs report starting on multiple social media platforms at a young age, where they were exposed to algorithms and engagement tools designed to hook young users and keep them scrolling.

Over time, this constant exposure has been linked to worsening teen mental health issues and lasting emotional distress.

Do I Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit_ - Overview of the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit - torhoerman law; Do I Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit_ - The Basis of the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit - torhoerman law; Potential Social Media Addiction Lawsuit Settlement Amounts; Who Qualifies to File a Claim in the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit?

Plaintiffs argue that these platforms failed to create safe environments or provide adequate warnings about the risks of overuse.

For some families, the psychological toll has been devastating, resulting in academic decline, social withdrawal, and long-term therapy needs.

As awareness of psychological harm continues to grow, more victims are stepping forward to hold social media companies accountable for the damage caused by addictive platform design.

Individuals and Families Eligible for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit

Individuals and families eligible for the social media addiction lawsuit include minors and young adults who developed serious mental health struggles after prolonged exposure to addictive social media platforms.

Parents or guardians may also file on behalf of children who experienced depression, anxiety, eating disorders, or severe mental health issues linked to excessive platform use.

Many claimants describe patterns of compulsive scrolling, disrupted sleep, and isolation that worsened their mental health outcomes over time.

In more serious cases, prolonged exposure has also affected physical health, contributing to malnutrition, fatigue, and self-harm behaviors.

Families pursuing claims seek accountability for design choices that encouraged dependency and failed to protect vulnerable young users.

Individuals and Families Eligible for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit

You may qualify if:

  • You or your child used one or more major social media platforms frequently as a minor.
  • A doctor, therapist, or mental health professional has diagnosed depression, anxiety, an eating disorder, or another serious condition.
  • You or your child required medical treatment, counseling, or hospitalization related to mental health struggles.
  • Social media use led to observable physical health changes such as disordered eating, sleep disruption, or self-harm.
  • These harms can be documented through medical records, therapy notes, or other evidence linking use to severe mental health issues.

Public Entities are Also Filing Social Media Addiction Lawsuits

In addition to individual and family claims, many public entities, including school districts and municipalities, are pursuing litigation against social media companies for the costs and consequences of young people’s mental health challenges tied to platform use.

More than 200 school districts nationwide have filed lawsuits alleging that addictive features on platforms like Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat and other social media platforms shifted the burden of counseling, supervision, and crisis‐management onto public systems.

These entities assert legal theories similar to individual claims, such as negligence claims and public nuisance, arguing that the platforms’ design and promotion of excessive use created foreseeable mental health risks in children and teens.

While TorHoerman Law focuses exclusively on individuals and families, it is essential to understand the broader context: public‐entity suits bolster the legal landscape around social media harm lawsuits and may influence discovery, precedent, and the overall pressure on major social media companies.

Individuals and Families Eligible for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit; Public Entities are Also Filing Social Media Addiction Lawsuits

For instance, one recent lawsuit by a large city claims the platforms deliberately targeted minors and exploited their developing brains in ways that increased rates of depression, anxiety, and self‐harm among youth.

This cross‐sector litigation signals that schools and local governments view the harm as systemic, not just individual, and are seeking accountability for the broader impact of social media classrooms and campuses now struggle to manage.

Defendants & Platforms Named in the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit

The litigation broadly targets the parent companies and subsidiaries of the most widely used youth-oriented social media applications, on the theory that these companies knowingly designed platforms that contribute to harmful patterns of use.

Individuals and Families Eligible for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit; Public Entities are Also Filing Social Media Addiction Lawsuits; Defendants & Platforms Named in the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit

Major social media companies named in the lawsuit include:

  • Meta Platforms, Inc.: The parent company of Facebook and Instagram, named for allegedly implementing algorithmic designs aimed at maximizing screen time among young users.
  • ByteDance, Inc.: Owner of TikTok, a platform cited in the lawsuits for its short-form video format and recommendation algorithms that may accelerate compulsive use.
  • Snap Inc.: Developer of Snapchat, named as a defendant due to features like “streaks” and ephemeral messages that plaintiffs claim intensify addictive behavior.
  • Alphabet Inc.: The parent company of YouTube (via Google), which is also implicated in the litigation under claims that its platform contributes to young people’s mental health burdens by facilitating extended viewing and exposure to harmful content.
  • Other social media companies: The MDL complaint and related filings identify subsidiaries, affiliates, and other lesser-publicized platforms under the same theories of product design, notification schemes, and youth targeting.

How Social Media Companies are Defending Themselves

The defendants in the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit are mounting aggressive legal defenses aimed at limiting their liability for the growing number of claims consolidated in the federal Social Media MDL.

Their arguments center on long-standing legal protections and constitutional claims that have shielded technology companies in previous online-content cases.

These social media giants deny responsibility for the widespread mental health effects tied to platform design, asserting that users and parents bear the primary duty to manage online behavior.

By reframing the lawsuits as attacks on speech rather than product design, the companies hope to dismiss or narrow claims before trial.

One of the primary defenses is based on the Communications Decency Act (CDA), particularly Section 230, which protects internet companies from liability for content posted by third parties.

The platforms argue that their recommendation systems, feeds, and notifications merely display user-generated material and therefore fall under this protection.

Plaintiffs, however, maintain that these suits are not about content moderation but about defective design, alleging that addictive algorithms and engagement loops are features of the products themselves, not user speech.

Individuals and Families Eligible for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit; Public Entities are Also Filing Social Media Addiction Lawsuits; Defendants & Platforms Named in the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit; Do I Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit_ - How Social Media Companies are Defending Themselves - torhoerman law

Other common defense strategies include constitutional, procedural, and causation-based arguments:

  • First Amendment protection: Companies claim that curating and recommending content constitutes protected expression under the U.S. Constitution.
  • Parental responsibility: Defendants assert that parents, not platforms, are responsible for monitoring screen time and social media exposure.
  • Causation disputes: They argue that no direct scientific proof links specific design features to the mental health outcomes alleged in the lawsuits.
  • Product classification challenges: Platforms maintain that social media is not a “product” under product-liability law, framing their services as communication tools instead.
  • Reliance on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act: Defendants continue to cite this statute as a legal barrier to liability, claiming immunity from most user-related harms.

These defenses remain under active review as courts determine the extent to which social media companies can rely on traditional internet immunity laws to shield themselves from claims of negligence and defective design.

Despite these arguments, recent rulings have allowed several key claims (particularly those involving product design and failure to warn) to move forward in the ongoing federal litigation.

Do You Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit?

If you or your child experienced significant emotional, behavioral, or physical changes after years of social media use, you may qualify to join the social media addiction lawsuit.

These lawsuits focus on individuals who developed depression, anxiety, eating disorders, or self-harm tendencies linked to prolonged exposure to addictive social media platforms.

Individuals and Families Eligible for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit; Public Entities are Also Filing Social Media Addiction Lawsuits; Defendants & Platforms Named in the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit; Do I Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit_ - How Social Media Companies are Defending Themselves - torhoerman law; Do I Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit_ - Do You Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit_ - torhoerman law

Plaintiffs claim that companies like Meta, TikTok, Snapchat, and YouTube intentionally designed their apps to keep users scrolling, often at the expense of young people’s mental health.

Families with documented mental health diagnoses or treatment histories related to social media use may have strong cases for compensation.

The litigation also considers the length of time spent on the platforms, the age of first use, and the severity of psychological or physical harm sustained.

Those who can demonstrate that harmful use began in childhood or adolescence are often among the most eligible participants.

Even if you are uncertain whether your situation qualifies, an experienced attorney can evaluate your evidence and medical history to determine eligibility.

TorHoerman Law is actively reviewing new claims and helping families nationwide understand their legal rights in this ongoing case.

Evidence in Social Media Addiction Claims

Evidence plays a central role in proving liability and damages in social media addiction lawsuits.

Plaintiffs must show a clear connection between their social media activity and the onset or worsening of mental health conditions such as anxiety, depression, or eating disorders.

Attorneys use both digital and medical documentation to demonstrate how platform design choices (like algorithms, notifications, and endless scrolling) contributed to harmful patterns of use.

Evidence can also help establish when excessive use began and how it affected academic, emotional, and physical well-being over time.

Collecting this information early strengthens a potential claim and supports inclusion in the ongoing social media addiction lawsuit.

Individuals and Families Eligible for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit; Public Entities are Also Filing Social Media Addiction Lawsuits; Defendants & Platforms Named in the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit; Do I Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit_ - How Social Media Companies are Defending Themselves - torhoerman law; Do I Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit_ - Do You Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit_ - torhoerman law; Do I Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit_ - Evidence in Social Media Addiction Claims - torhoerman law

Evidence in a social media addiction lawsuit may include:

  • Social media account data (usage logs, screen time reports, or download records from apps like Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, or YouTube)
  • Medical records documenting mental health diagnoses, treatment plans, or hospitalization related to anxiety, depression, self-harm, or eating disorders
  • Therapist or counselor notes showing behavioral or emotional changes tied to excessive platform use
  • School records indicating academic decline, attendance issues, or disciplinary actions related to social media activity
  • Witness statements from parents, teachers, or peers describing behavioral changes or dependency
  • Screenshots or saved posts showing harmful content exposure, cyberbullying, or body-image triggers
  • Expert testimony from mental health professionals linking platform use to measurable emotional or psychological harm

Damages and Potential Compensation in Social Media Addiction Cases

In social media lawsuits, damages represent the financial, emotional, and physical losses suffered as a result of compulsive platform use and resulting mental health harm.

Attorneys help victims and families assess the full scope of these losses by reviewing medical expenses, treatment needs, and the long-term emotional effects of social media addiction.

Calculating damages often requires collaboration with mental health professionals, economists, and medical experts to document the extent of the harm and its projected future impact.

A qualified lawyer can also identify non-economic losses such as emotional distress and loss of enjoyment of life that may not appear in medical records.

Individuals and Families Eligible for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit; Public Entities are Also Filing Social Media Addiction Lawsuits; Defendants & Platforms Named in the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit; Do I Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit_ - How Social Media Companies are Defending Themselves - torhoerman law; Do I Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit_ - Do You Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit_ - torhoerman law; Do I Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit_ - Evidence in Social Media Addiction Claims - torhoerman law; Damages and Potential Compensation in Social Media Addiction Cases

Damages and potential compensation in social media addiction lawsuits may include:

  • Medical Expenses: Costs of therapy, hospitalization, medication, and psychiatric treatment for conditions such as depression, anxiety, or eating disorders.
  • Future Treatment Costs: Ongoing counseling, rehabilitation, and long-term mental health care expected to continue after the lawsuit.
  • Pain and Suffering: Compensation for emotional distress, self-esteem loss, and psychological trauma caused by addictive platform use.
  • Loss of Enjoyment of Life: Damages for the diminished ability to participate in normal activities, relationships, or hobbies.
  • Lost Wages or Earning Capacity: Income lost due to missed school, work, or reduced career potential tied to mental health decline.
  • Educational Losses: Academic setbacks, school withdrawal, or tutoring expenses related to behavioral or emotional instability.
  • Parental or Family Damages: Lost income, emotional distress, and strain experienced by parents or guardians caring for an affected child.
  • Physical Health Damages: Harm such as malnutrition, sleep deprivation, or self-inflicted injuries linked to excessive use.
  • Wrongful Death Damages: Compensation for families who lost a child or loved one to suicide or fatal self-harm tied to social media addiction.

Contact TorHoerman Law's Social Media Addiction Lawyers Today

If you or your child have suffered from anxiety, depression, self-harm, or other mental health problems linked to excessive use of social media, now is the time to learn about your legal options.

TorHoerman Law is actively reviewing cases from individuals and families across the country to join the ongoing social media lawsuits against the companies that designed these harmful platforms.

Our team has the experience, resources, and compassion to help victims of social media addiction cases pursue the justice and compensation they deserve.

We understand how these platforms exploit young users through addictive algorithms and engagement tactics, and we are committed to holding them accountable for the damage they’ve caused.

Damages and Potential Compensation in Social Media Addiction Cases; Do I Qualify for the Social Media Addiction Lawsuit_ - TorHoerman Law_ Investigating the Social Media Lawsuit - torhoerman law

Your first step toward recovery and accountability begins with a free, confidential consultation.

Contact TorHoerman Law’s social media addiction lawyers today to discuss your potential claim.

There are no upfront costs, and you pay nothing unless we win your case.

You can also use the chat feature on this page to find out if you’re eligible to file a social media addiction lawsuit instantly.

Frequently Asked Questions

Published By:
Picture of Tor Hoerman

Tor Hoerman

Owner & Attorney - TorHoerman Law

Do You
Have A Case?

Here, at TorHoerman Law, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.

Since 2009, we have successfully collected over $4 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.

Would you like our help?

About TorHoerman Law

At TorHoerman Law, we believe that if we continue to focus on the people that we represent, and continue to be true to the people that we are – justice will always be served.

Do you believe you’re entitled to compensation?

Use our Instant Case Evaluator to find out in as little as 60 seconds!

$495 Million
Baby Formula NEC Lawsuit

In this case, we obtained a verdict of $495 Million for our client’s child who was diagnosed with Necrotizing Enterocolitis after consuming baby formula manufactured by Abbott Laboratories.

$20 Million
Toxic Tort Injury

In this case, we were able to successfully recover $20 Million for our client after they suffered a Toxic Tort Injury due to chemical exposure.

$103.8 Million
COX-2 Inhibitors Injury

In this case, we were able to successfully recover $103.8 Million for our client after they suffered a COX-2 Inhibitors Injury.

$4 Million
Traumatic Brain Injury

In this case, we were able to successfully recover $4 Million for our client after they suffered a Traumatic Brain Injury while at daycare.

$2.8 Million
Defective Heart Device

In this case, we were able to successfully recover $2.8 Million for our client after they suffered an injury due to a Defective Heart Device.

Guides & Resources
Do You
Have A Case?

Here, at TorHoerman Law, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.

Since 2009, we have successfully collected over $4 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.

Would you like our help?

Additional Social Media Mental Health Lawsuit resources on our website:
All
FAQs
Injuries & Conditions
Legal Help
Other Resources
Settlements & Compensation
News
You can learn more about the Social Media Mental Health Lawsuit by visiting any of our pages listed below:
Facebook Mental Health Lawsuit
FAQ: Who Are the Defendants in the Social Media Lawsuit?
Instagram Mental Health Lawsuit
Potential Damages in Social Media Lawsuits
Snapchat Lawsuit
Social Media Addiction Lawsuits
Social Media Anorexia Lawsuit
Social Media Body Dysmorphia Lawsuit
Social Media Bulimia Lawsuit
Social Media Depression Lawsuit
Social Media Eating Disorders Lawsuit
Social Media Exploitation Lawsuit
Social Media Harm Lawsuit Injuries
Social Media Harm Lawsuit Settlement Amounts
Social Media Mental Health Lawsuit
Social Media Self Harm Lawsuit
Social Media Suicide Lawsuit
Social Media's Effects on Mental Health
TikTok Mental Health Lawsuit
YouTube Addiction Lawsuit

Share

Other Social Media Mental Health Lawsuit Resources

All
FAQs
Injuries & Conditions
Legal Help
Other Resources
Settlements & Compensation
News

What Our Clients Have To Say