Can Instagram Ruin Your Life? The Jury Will Decide.

In a state court in Los Angeles this week, 12 jurors are hearing opening arguments in a case that has the potential to change social media—maybe even the internet—as we know it.

The trial, which began today, is a bellwether: Similar individual cases have been filed all around the country, and a massive federal case with more than 2,000 plaintiffs is expected to proceed this summer. In each case, the plaintiffs accuse social-media companies of releasing defective products. The argument is that these products were built with dangerously habit-forming features—including the endless-scroll feed, algorithmic recommendations, and push notifications—that have led to an array of serious health problems. Plaintiffs also accuse the companies of failing to warn users about the risks of using their products and of deliberately concealing their dangers.

The L.A. case is the first to make it to trial. It is scheduled to last about six weeks, and it focuses heavily on Meta—in particular, Instagram. (The defendant originally included TikTok, Snap, and YouTube. TikTok and Snap settled with the plaintiff last month rather than go to trial. YouTube remains part of the case, though it is less central to the complaint. The company has said that allegations against it are “simply untrue.”) The lawsuit asks an existential question about Meta’s business: Can the fundamental design and most basic features of Instagram directly cause mental-health problems in kids and teenagers? The jury will be asked to answer that question, and Meta is taking a big risk by allowing it to do so (though it can appeal to a judge if it loses).

The plaintiff in this case is a 19-year-old California woman who is named only by her initials, K.G.M., because the events that she’s suing over happened when she was a minor.