Jury selection began Wednesday in Los Angeles in the next bellwether trial over claims that social media apps are built to hook young users, with Meta and Snap as defendants and Snap facing a jury in one of these cases for the first time.
A California state judge consolidated two plaintiffs' cases into one trial, CP24 reported. Opening statements are set for November 4 if no further settlements intervene. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Instagram chief Adam Mosseri and Snap CEO Evan Spiegel are expected to testify starting in mid-November.
Who is suing, and over what
The plaintiffs are identified in court only by initials. S.J., a teenager from Illinois, began using Snapchat at 13. K.D.B., now 18 and from Mississippi, began using the apps at 15. Both allege that design features such as autoplay and infinite scrolling encouraged compulsive use and damaged their mental and physical health, and they seek unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, TokenPost reported. Those are allegations that no jury has decided.
The cases belong to a coordinated state proceeding in Los Angeles Superior Court, JCCP 5255, overseen by Judge Carolyn B. Kuhl, which the AEI Center for Technology, Science and Energy described as gathering more than 1,000 cases from across the country. A separate federal docket sits in Oakland before Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers.
What is actually left for the jury
Settlements have already trimmed the trial. The newsroom's breakdown, based on CP24 and TokenPost:
TikTok: Settled with both plaintiffs before trial.
YouTube: Settled with both plaintiffs before trial.
Meta: Settled with S.J. Still faces K.D.B.
Snap: Still faces both plaintiffs.
That leaves three live claims from an original eight pairings of plaintiff and company, and Snap is the only defendant facing both.
The legal theory
The plaintiffs are not suing over what other users posted. Platforms have broad protection for third-party content under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act and the First Amendment. Instead, the cases target the product itself, arguing that features like infinite scroll and autoplay are design choices a company can be held responsible for. In November 2025, Kuhl denied the companies' motions for summary judgment, letting the first case go to trial on negligence and negligent failure to warn theories. If a jury traces a harm to third-party content rather than design, AEI noted, those immunities could come back into play.
This is a civil trial, so the plaintiffs need only show their claims are more likely true than not, a far lower bar than the criminal standard we explained in What Reasonable Doubt Means for Jurors.
What the first trial produced
The first bellwether, known as K.G.M., ended March 25 with a $6 million verdict against Meta and YouTube, with 70 percent of the fault assigned to Meta and 30 percent to YouTube, TokenPost reported. Snap and TikTok had settled before that trial. During deliberations the jury told Kuhl it was struggling to reach a verdict on one defendant, the kind of moment we walked through in What Happens After a Hung Jury. Meta has appealed.
What the companies say
Meta said, "We disagree with these allegations and will defend ourselves in court," and in another statement said "A young person's mental health is shaped by many factors, as the evidence in this trial will show." A Snap spokesperson said, "We believe the evidence will support that we have put our community first," and the company said the allegations "fundamentally misrepresent" users' experiences and how Snapchat was designed.
Bellwether verdicts do not bind the thousands of other pending cases, but they set the price of settling them. A second loss, or a first win for the companies, will shape how much the remaining plaintiffs can demand.
Two Taps News stories summarize reporting and the analysis discussed on Two Taps and Friends. They are not legal advice. Read our standards.
