TikTok reached a last-minute settlement to avoid being pulled into a closely watched social media addiction trial, striking a deal just hours before jury selection was set to begin in a California courtroom.

Allegations of Algorithm-Driven Harm

The case was brought by a 20-year-old woman identified as KGM, who alleges that the design of social media algorithms left her addicted to online platforms and caused lasting damage to her mental health.

“The parties are pleased to have reached an amicable resolution of this dispute,” the Social Media Victims Law Center said in a statement announcing the TikTok addiction lawsuit settlement, noting that the terms remain confidential.

TikTok’s exit leaves Meta — the parent company of Instagram and Facebook — and Google, which owns YouTube, as the remaining defendants. Snapchat reached its own settlement with the plaintiff last week.

A Turning Point for Tech Liability

The companies named in the suit have consistently argued that the plaintiff has failed to show they are responsible for alleged harms such as depression and eating disorders. Still, the case moving forward to trial marks a significant shift in how U.S. courts are confronting claims that social media platforms fuel addictive behavior.

For decades, tech firms have relied on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a 1996 law shielding platforms from liability for user-generated content. But this case zeroes in not on posts themselves, but on product design — algorithms, notifications and engagement features that critics say hook users and keep them scrolling.

“Dangerous and Addictive Algorithms”

KGM’s attorney, Matthew Bergman, said the trial represents uncharted legal territory. He told the BBC it would be the first time a jury would hear evidence holding a social media company directly accountable for addiction-related harms.

“Unfortunately, there are all too many kids in the United States, the UK, and around the world who are suffering as KGM does because of the dangerous and addictive algorithms that the social media platforms foist on unsuspecting kids,” Bergman said. “These companies are going to have to explain to a jury why their profits were more important than the lives of our young people.”

High Stakes for Silicon Valley

Eric Goldman, a law professor at Santa Clara University, said adverse verdicts could threaten the very foundation of social media businesses. Still, he cautioned that proving a direct causal link between platform design and physical or psychological harm remains a steep challenge.

“The fact that the plaintiffs have been able to sell that idea has opened the door to a whole bunch of new legal questions that the law wasn’t really designed to answer,” Goldman said.

Inside the Courtroom

Jurors are expected to review extensive evidence, including excerpts from internal company documents that rarely see daylight.

“A lot of what these companies have been trying to shield from the public is likely going to be aired in court,” said Mary Graw Leary, a law professor at Catholic University of America.

Meta said it has rolled out dozens of tools designed to make its platforms safer for teens and disputes the allegations. “We strongly disagree with these claims and are confident the evidence will show our longstanding commitment to supporting young people,” the company said. Researchers, however, have questioned how effective those tools truly are.

Executives Under Pressure

The companies are expected to argue that any alleged harm stems from third-party users rather than platform design. One of the most anticipated witnesses is Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who is scheduled to testify early in the trial.

In 2024, Zuckerberg told U.S. senators that existing scientific research had not demonstrated a causal link between social media use and worsening mental health among young people. During that same hearing, he apologized to victims and families who had gathered in the chamber.

Tech leaders often struggle under cross-examination, said Mary Anne Franks, a law professor at George Washington University. She noted companies are “very much hoping” to avoid putting top executives on the stand.

Global Scrutiny Intensifies

The trial unfolds as social media companies face mounting pressure from families, school districts and regulators worldwide. Last year, dozens of U.S. states sued Meta, accusing it of misleading the public about the risks of social media and contributing to a youth mental health crisis.

Australia has already enacted a ban on social media use for children under 16, and the United Kingdom signaled in January it may follow suit.

“There is a tipping point when it comes to the harms of social media,” Franks said. “The tech industry has been given deferential treatment — and we’re starting to see that change.”