What Is the Instagram Lawsuit?
The Instagram lawsuit is a mass-tort litigation against Meta alleging that Instagram was designed to encourage compulsive use by young people and caused mental health harm. It runs in two coordinated tracks, federal MDL 3047 in Oakland, California, and California state proceeding JCCP 5255 in Los Angeles.
Plaintiffs include individual teens and young adults and their families, school districts, and state governments. The cases name Meta Platforms, Inc. and Instagram, LLC, and many also name Snap, TikTok and YouTube for their own apps. Meta says it has spent more than a decade building protections for teens and continues to defend itself in court.
The phrase "Instagram lawsuit" is also used for older, separate Instagram cases, including an Illinois privacy settlement, which are covered under the comparison heading below.
“These actions present common factual questions arising from allegations that defendants' social media platforms are defective because they are designed to maximize user screen time, which can encourage addictive behavior in adolescents.”
Source: Source: U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, In re: Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 3047, Transfer Order, Document 119 (October 6, 2022)
Why Are People Filing Instagram Lawsuits?
People are filing Instagram lawsuits because plaintiffs allege Meta designed Instagram to maximize screen time in adolescents, knew the platform could harm minors, and did not warn the public. The Judicial Panel's 2022 centralization order describes these as the shared allegations across the first cases.
The Panel's order lists specific design questions common to the claims against Meta. They include whether Instagram and Facebook encourage addictive behavior, fail to verify users' ages, encourage adolescents to bypass parental controls, and inadequately safeguard against harmful content or amplify it.
State governments sued for a related reason. The multistate attorneys general case, filed in 2023, alleged that Meta designed Instagram with addictive features and misled the public about how safe the platform was for young users. School districts add a third reason, alleging they spent more resources on student mental health services because of student use of the platforms.
What Injuries Are Included in the Instagram Lawsuit?
The injuries included in the Instagram lawsuit are six categories of mental health harm that plaintiffs link to compulsive Instagram use. Each category below has its own heading, a plain definition of the term, and a summary of what plaintiffs allege.
Every item describes an allegation, not a court finding. Only one jury has reached a verdict so far, in a single Los Angeles case described under case status below, and causation is decided plaintiff by plaintiff.
Depression
Depression is a mood condition marked by persistent sadness, loss of interest, and changes in sleep, energy, or concentration that can interfere with daily life.
Plaintiffs allege that heavy Instagram use contributed to depressive symptoms serious enough to need therapy, psychiatric treatment, medication, or hospitalization. Law firms screening these claims generally look for a documented diagnosis and treatment history.
Depression is common and has many possible causes, so these claims depend on showing how the timeline of Instagram use lines up with the onset and course of the condition.
Anxiety
Anxiety, in a clinical sense, is persistent and excessive worry or fear that is difficult to control and affects school, work, or relationships.
Plaintiffs allege that features built around likes, followers, comments, direct messages, and notifications encouraged compulsive checking that fed anxiety. Some firms also screen for sleep disruption and compulsive nighttime scrolling alongside the anxiety diagnosis.
Eating Disorders
An eating disorder is a serious condition involving lasting disturbances in eating behavior, such as restrictive eating, together with distressing thoughts about food and body weight.
Plaintiffs allege that recommendation feeds repeatedly showed young users dieting content and appearance-focused posts. One plaintiff whose claims against Meta settled on October 30, 2026 alleged that using Instagram as a child contributed to an eating disorder, along with depression and suicidal thoughts.
Body Dysmorphia
Body dysmorphia, or body dysmorphic disorder, is a mental health condition in which a person becomes preoccupied with perceived flaws in their appearance.
Body dysmorphia is among the harms alleged by the plaintiff in the March 2026 Los Angeles trial. Plaintiffs connect it to social comparison and appearance-focused content on the platform, and no court has ruled generally on whether Instagram causes the condition.
Self-Harm
Self-harm is the act of deliberately injuring oneself, often as a way of coping with emotional distress.
Plaintiffs allege that self-harm behavior developed alongside heavy platform use and exposure to harmful content. These claims typically require medical or counseling records documenting when the behavior began and what treatment followed.
Suicidal Ideation
Suicidal ideation means thinking about or planning to end one's own life, and clinicians treat it as a serious symptom rather than a diagnosis by itself.
Families of teens who died by suicide have brought wrongful death claims in the litigation, and other plaintiffs allege suicidal thoughts without a death. People in the United States who are in crisis can call or text 988 to reach the Suicide and Crisis Lifeline.
Who Qualifies for the Instagram Lawsuit?
You may qualify if:
- You or your child used Instagram heavily, and the use began as a minor, since some firms screen for social media use that started before age 21
- You have a documented serious harm such as depression, anxiety, an eating disorder, body dysmorphia, self-harm, or suicidal thoughts, with treatment records
- The timeline of Instagram use and the start of the harm can be documented, for example through account data and medical or school records
- Your claim falls within your state's statute of limitations, which for minors often starts when the person turns 18, but not in every state or for every claim type
You may not qualify if:
- Your use was heavy but caused no documented injury, since firms say they are not looking to take every teenager who spent a lot of time on Instagram
- Your claim is a privacy claim covered by the Illinois Instagram biometric settlement, whose claim deadline passed on September 27, 2023
- Your claim is a government's claim for its own costs, since states resolved theirs through attorneys general rather than individual filings
MDL 3047 and JCCP 5255 coordinate many individual cases for shared pretrial work and are not certified class actions, so each person's eligibility is evaluated on their own facts. Screening criteria differ between law firms, and only a qualified attorney reviewing your records and your state's deadlines can confirm whether you qualify.
What Is the Current Status of the Instagram Lawsuit?
The current status of the Instagram lawsuit is active in two coordinated courts, with federal MDL 3047 still in pretrial proceedings and California proceeding JCCP 5255 heading into its second bellwether trial against Snap. The tables below track each proceeding separately.
No global settlement has been announced for individual injury claims, and the dollar figures that exist belong to other claimants, as the settlement heading below explains.
MDL 3047: Federal Proceeding
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation centralized MDL 3047 in the Northern District of California on October 6, 2022 and assigned it to Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. The JPML's October 1, 2026 report lists 3,824 pending actions in MDL 3047, out of 4,009 actions in the docket's history.
| Court | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (Oakland) |
| Docket Number | MDL No. 3047, 4:22-md-03047-YGR |
| Judge | Chief Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers |
| Created | October 6, 2022 (JPML Transfer Order, Document 119) |
| Pending Actions | 3,824 (JPML report dated October 1, 2026) |
| Defendants | Meta, Snap, TikTok and ByteDance, YouTube, Google and Alphabet |
| Status | Pretrial; next school-district bellwether trials expected around February 2027 |
The first federal school-district bellwether, brought by Breathitt County School District in Kentucky, settled before its June 2026 trial. Reporting says the next school-district trials, Tucson Unified and Charleston County, are expected around February 2027, and those dates have shifted before.
On August 26, 2026, Judge Gonzalez Rogers entered a consent judgment resolving the multistate attorneys general case against Meta, People of the State of California et al. v. Meta Platforms, Inc., No. 4:23-cv-05448-YGR. New York's attorney general says Meta will pay at least $12.1 billion, rising to up to $17.1 billion if other platforms reach similar settlements, and must add teen limits on Facebook and Instagram, including a two-hour daily limit and no access between midnight and 6 a.m. The judgment resolves government claims, and individual injury claims remain pending.
JCCP 5255: California State Proceeding
JCCP 5255 coordinates the California state-court social media injury cases in Los Angeles Superior Court before Judge Carolyn Kuhl. The first bellwether, K.G.M. v. Meta, ended on March 25, 2026 with a jury finding Meta and YouTube negligent in the design of their apps and awarding $6 million, split between $3 million in compensatory damages and $3 million in punitive damages.
| Court | Los Angeles County Superior Court |
| Proceeding | JCCP 5255 (California judicial council coordination) |
| Judge | Judge Carolyn Kuhl |
| First Bellwether | K.G.M. v. Meta, verdict March 25, 2026 |
| Fault Split | Meta 70 percent, YouTube (Google) 30 percent |
| Second Bellwether | Two plaintiffs, S.J. and K.D.B.; Meta settled with both; Snap remains |
| Status | Second bellwether trial against Snap beginning; opening statements set for November 4, 2026 |
Judge Kuhl denied the defendants' post-trial motions on June 9, 2026, leaving the K.G.M. verdict in place, and Meta has said it is appealing. Snap and TikTok settled with that plaintiff before trial on confidential terms.
In the second Los Angeles bellwether, Judge Kuhl combined two plaintiffs' cases before one jury. Meta settled with S.J. and then with K.D.B. during jury selection, and TikTok and YouTube had already settled with both, leaving Snap Inc. as the only defendant. Meta said it will keep defending itself in other cases.
How Much Is the Instagram Lawsuit Settlement Payout?
The Instagram lawsuit settlement payout has no single set amount for individual injury claims, because no global settlement or per-claimant payment schedule has been announced in MDL 3047 or JCCP 5255 as of November 2026.
The dollar figures that exist belong to other claimants and other claims, such as governments, a school district, and one verdict winner. What an individual claim could be worth depends on the severity of the harm, the evidence linking it to Instagram use, state law, and the choices the defendants make, and only a qualified attorney reviewing your records can give a case-specific view.
The Los Angeles jury in K.G.M. v. Meta awarded one plaintiff $6 million in March 2026, and Reuters reported that four companies paid about $27 million in total to settle the Breathitt County school district's claims, with Meta paying $9 million of it. Neither figure sets a payout for other individual plaintiffs.
The state attorneys general money described above goes to governments, not to people who file injury claims. Settlements with individual Los Angeles plaintiffs have been confidential, so they give no public benchmark either.
The Instagram class action claim form that many people search for belongs to a closed Illinois privacy settlement, described under related cases below, not to the injury litigation on this page.
Instagram Lawsuit Updates
The latest Instagram lawsuit updates are listed below by date, newest first, and they cover both federal MDL 3047 and California proceeding JCCP 5255. As of November 2026, both proceedings remain active, and the entries include earlier Instagram cases so each ruling or settlement can be placed in context.
Instagram Lawsuit Timeline of Events
Meta Settles With the Second Los Angeles Bellwether Plaintiff, Leaving Snap Alone
Meta settled the claims of K.D.B., an 18-year-old plaintiff, during jury selection in the second Los Angeles bellwether trial before Judge Carolyn Kuhl, NBC News reported on October 30, 2026. Meta had settled with the other plaintiff, S.J., the day before, the terms are confidential, and Snap Inc. is the only defendant left, with opening statements set for November 4, 2026.
JPML Report Lists 3,824 Pending Actions in MDL 3047
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation's October 1, 2026 report lists 3,824 actions pending in MDL 3047 before Chief Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers in the Northern District of California. The report counts 4,009 actions in the docket's total history.
Judge Gonzalez Rogers Enters Consent Judgment in the Attorneys General Case Against Meta
Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers entered a consent judgment on August 26, 2026 in the multistate attorneys general case against Meta, which had gone to trial in Oakland earlier that month. New York's attorney general says Meta will pay at least $12.1 billion, rising to up to $17.1 billion, and add teen limits on Facebook and Instagram, while individual injury claims remain pending.
Judge Kuhl Denies Post-Trial Motions in K.G.M. v. Meta
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Carolyn Kuhl denied Meta's and YouTube's post-trial motions on June 9, 2026, leaving the $6 million K.G.M. verdict in place. Meta is appealing the verdict.
Meta Settles the First Federal School-District Bellwether
Meta settled the Breathitt County School District case in Kentucky on May 21, 2026, a few weeks before the June trial that Judge Gonzalez Rogers was set to hold in Oakland. Reuters reported the four defendants paid about $27 million in total, with Meta paying $9 million.
Los Angeles Jury Finds Meta and YouTube Negligent in K.G.M. v. Meta
A Los Angeles Superior Court jury found Meta and YouTube negligent in the design of their apps on March 25, 2026 and awarded the plaintiff, identified as K.G.M., $6 million, including $3 million in punitive damages. The jury assigned 70 percent of the fault to Meta, the owner of Instagram, and 30 percent to YouTube.
New Mexico Jury Orders Meta to Pay $375 Million
A Santa Fe jury ordered Meta to pay $375 million on March 24, 2026 for 75,000 willful violations of New Mexico's Unfair Practices Act, the statutory maximum of $5,000 per violation, in a case brought by the state attorney general over child safety on Facebook and Instagram. Meta said it disagrees with the verdict and will appeal.
Illinois Court Enters Amended Final Judgment in the Instagram Biometric Settlement
The DuPage County, Illinois court entered an amended final judgment on March 7, 2024 in Parris v. Meta Platforms, Inc., the $68.5 million Instagram settlement under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act. The claim deadline had already passed on September 27, 2023.
JPML Transfers a Louisiana School District's Instagram Case Into MDL 3047
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation transferred the Livingston Parish school district case to MDL 3047 on December 6, 2023, over the district's objection. The Panel noted that it had transferred numerous school-district cases alleging Meta and TikTok designed Instagram and TikTok to be addictive to minors.
JPML Centralizes the Social Media Addiction Cases in MDL 3047
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation centralized the social media adolescent addiction cases in the Northern District of California on October 6, 2022 under MDL No. 3047 and assigned them to Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers. The Panel counted 28 actions in 17 districts on the motion and notified 56 related actions in 24 districts.
The Wall Street Journal Reports on Meta's Internal Instagram Research
The Wall Street Journal reported on September 14, 2021 that Facebook's internal research found 32 percent of teen girls who felt bad about their bodies said Instagram made them feel worse. Facebook responded that this meant one in three of those girls, not one in three of all teenage girls.
Brittany Conditi Files a Class Action Over Instagram Camera Access
Brittany Conditi filed Conditi v. Instagram, LLC and Facebook, Inc., No. 3:20-cv-06534, in the Northern District of California on September 17, 2020. The complaint alleges Instagram accessed users' smartphone cameras without permission, which is a different claim from the addiction litigation.
How to File an Instagram Lawsuit
Filing an Instagram lawsuit generally involves the 5 steps outlined below.
- Gather your medical and mental health records: Collect diagnoses, therapy and psychiatric notes, medication records, and hospital records that show the harm and when it began.
- Document the Instagram use: Save account details and, where possible, download your Instagram account data so the timeline of use can be matched to the timeline of harm.
- Check your state's filing deadline: Statutes of limitations vary by state, the injured person's age, and the type of claim, and a missed deadline can end a strong claim.
- Consult a social media harm attorney: An attorney can screen the claim against current criteria, which differ between firms, and explain whether federal or California state court fits your case.
- Let your attorney file the case: Counsel files the complaint, and a federal case is generally sent into MDL 3047 while a California state case may join JCCP 5255.
Answer a few questions and a case reviewer will follow up. Free, no obligation.
A case reviewer will follow up soon.
What Evidence Do I Need for an Instagram Lawsuit?
Evidence for an Instagram lawsuit generally has to show both the harm and the Instagram use that preceded it, because the central dispute in these cases is whether the platform caused the injury. Records that plaintiffs and law firms typically gather include:
- Medical, therapy, psychiatric, and hospital records documenting the diagnosis, treatment, and dates.
- Instagram account data and screenshots showing when the account was opened and how heavily it was used.
- School records showing changes in grades, attendance, or behavior.
- A written timeline from the injured person or a parent that places key events in order.
- For wrongful death claims, records and documents from the family that relate to the death.
Depression and anxiety are common and have several possible causes, so firms say they look closely at the seriousness of the condition and the treatment history before accepting a case.
What Did Meta Allegedly Know About Instagram's Effect on Teens?
Plaintiffs allege that Meta knew Instagram could harm minors and did not warn the public. The Judicial Panel's 2022 order records that allegation as common to the cases it centralized, and it names seven Meta entities, including Meta Platforms, Inc. and Instagram, LLC.
Much of the public debate traces to a September 2021 Wall Street Journal report on Facebook's internal research. Facebook responded that the finding applied to one in three teenage girls who already felt bad about their bodies, not to all teenage girls.
The 2023 multistate suit alleged Meta misled the public about the safety of its platforms for young users. Meta says it has spent more than a decade building teen protections and will keep defending itself in court.
| Defendant group | Platforms | Treatment in the Panel's order |
|---|---|---|
| Meta Platforms, Inc., Instagram, LLC, and related Meta entities | Instagram, Facebook | Principal defendant; claims against Meta share common questions of fact |
| Snap, Inc. | Snapchat | Opposed inclusion; claims against it were included |
| TikTok, Inc. and ByteDance Inc. | TikTok | Opposed inclusion; claims against it were included |
| YouTube, LLC, Google LLC, and Alphabet Inc. | YouTube | Opposed inclusion; claims against it were included |
The Panel declined to separate the claims against the non-Meta defendants and send them back to their original courts, reasoning that plaintiffs allege common injuries from multiple products.
How Does the Instagram Lawsuit Compare to Other Meta Cases?
The Instagram lawsuit compares to other Meta cases by covering individual injury and school-district claims rather than government, privacy, or consumer-protection claims. Several separate Meta and Instagram cases share the search term, and each has its own court, claimants, and outcome.
| Case | Court | Who it covers | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| MDL 3047 and JCCP 5255 (this page) | N.D. Cal. and Los Angeles Superior Court | Individuals, families, school districts | Active; see case status above |
| State attorneys general v. Meta, No. 4:23-cv-05448-YGR | N.D. Cal. | State governments | Consent judgment entered August 26, 2026, described above |
| State of New Mexico v. Meta | New Mexico state court | State of New Mexico | Jury verdict of $375 million on March 24, 2026; a later public nuisance ruling is reported to have added $567 million |
| Parris v. Meta Platforms, Inc., No. 2023LA000672 | Eighteenth Judicial Circuit, DuPage County, Illinois | Instagram users in Illinois from August 10, 2015 to August 16, 2023 | $68.5 million settlement; claim deadline passed September 27, 2023 |
| Conditi v. Instagram, LLC, No. 3:20-cv-06534 | N.D. Cal. | Proposed class of Instagram users alleging camera access | Filed September 17, 2020; outcome not tracked on this page |
The Illinois case alleged Meta collected or stored biometric data through Instagram without meeting the state's Biometric Information Privacy Act. Meta denied wrongdoing, and the settlement fund pays eligible claimants pro rata after fees and costs, which is why searches for an Instagram class action claim form lead there.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Instagram lawsuit about?
The Instagram lawsuit is a mass-tort litigation against Meta alleging that Instagram was designed to encourage compulsive use and harmed the mental health of young users. It runs in federal MDL 3047 and California proceeding JCCP 5255, and Meta says it will keep defending itself.
Is the Instagram lawsuit a class action or MDL?
The Instagram lawsuit over addiction and mental health harm is an MDL and a California coordinated proceeding, not a certified class action. Each plaintiff's injury claim is evaluated individually, while the separate Illinois Instagram privacy settlement was a class action.
Has Meta settled the Instagram lawsuit?
Meta has settled parts of the Instagram lawsuit, but no global settlement exists for individual injury claims. It agreed to a state attorneys general consent judgment on August 26, 2026, settled the Breathitt County school-district case in May 2026, and settled both second-bellwether plaintiffs in Los Angeles on October 29 and 30, 2026.
Can I still claim the Instagram class action settlement?
No. The Instagram class action settlement of $68.5 million in Illinois closed to new claims when its claim deadline passed on September 27, 2023. That settlement covered Illinois Instagram users under the state biometric privacy law and is separate from the addiction lawsuit.
Who can join the Instagram lawsuit?
People who can join the Instagram lawsuit generally have a documented serious mental health harm tied to heavy Instagram use that began as a minor. Screening criteria differ between law firms, and only a qualified attorney reviewing your records and your state's filing deadline can confirm whether you qualify.
Did Meta lose the Instagram lawsuit trial in Los Angeles?
A Los Angeles jury found Meta and YouTube negligent in the first Instagram lawsuit trial and awarded $6 million, with 70 percent of the fault assigned to Meta. Judge Carolyn Kuhl denied post-trial motions on June 9, 2026, and Meta is appealing.
Is the Instagram lawsuit the same as the New Mexico case against Meta?
No. The Instagram lawsuit covers individual and school-district injury claims, while New Mexico's case is a separate consumer-protection suit by the state attorney general. A New Mexico jury ordered Meta to pay $375 million on March 24, 2026 in that case.