Federal Court Clears Kentucky School District’s Claims Against Major Social Media Companies for Trial

A federal court has denied efforts by Google (YouTube), Meta, TikTok, and Snapchat to dismiss claims brought by a Kentucky school district alleging that social media platforms were intentionally designed to harm young users. The ruling allows the case to proceed to trial and represents a significant development in the growing wave of litigation targeting the role of social media in youth mental health.

The Court’s Ruling

On February 9, 2026, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers of the Northern District of California issued a 31-page decision concluding that the Breathitt County School District in Kentucky had alleged sufficient facts to present its claims to a jury. The court set a trial date of June 12, 2026, in Oakland, California.

The court found that the district plausibly alleged that the defendant companies engineered their platforms to maximize engagement among minors, despite knowing that certain design features could be harmful. The claims focus on allegations that the platforms exposed young users to addictive content and potentially dangerous online trends, including viral “challenges” that allegedly encourage risky behavior.

Background of the Litigation

Breathitt County is one of more than 2,300 plaintiffs across six states (California, Arizona, Kentucky, Maryland, New Jersey, and South Carolina) bringing claims against major social media companies. The litigation includes over 1,000 school districts, as well as state attorneys general, teenagers, and families who allege that social media use has contributed to increased anxiety, depression, self harm, and classroom disruption among minors.

These cases were consolidated in 2022 as part of a federal multidistrict litigation (MDL), alongside more than 1,000 personal injury actions. Plaintiffs across the MDL contend that social media platforms were deliberately designed to maximize user engagement and corresponding advertising revenue at the expense of minors’ mental health, safety, and educational development.

Allegations by the School District

The Breathitt County School District alleges that it has struggled for years to mitigate the effects of social media on students. According to the record, the district began implementing online filters as early as 2016 to restrict access to social media platforms on school networks. Despite those measures, the district maintains that social media related issues have continued to affect classroom environments and student behavior. Superintendent Phillip Watts testified that he now spends approximately 20% of his work time addressing concerns tied to social media use, ranging from classroom distractions to more serious behavioral and emotional issues among students.

The district’s claims center on alleged deficiencies in platform safeguards, including assertions that the companies:

• Failed to implement meaningful age verification mechanisms;
• Allowed minors to bypass parental controls;
• Lacked tools to clearly label edited or potentially deceptive content; and
• Provided insufficient options for limiting screen time or easily deactivating accounts.

What Comes Next

With the motion to dismiss denied, Breathitt County will be among the first plaintiffs to test these allegations before a jury. Observers view the case as a bellwether that could influence the trajectory of thousands of similar claims currently pending in the MDL.

While the defendants continue to deny wrongdoing, the upcoming trial may shape how courts assess product design claims involving social media platforms, particularly those focused on youth engagement and mental health.

Key Takeaways

• Product design claims survive: The ruling signals that courts may allow claims based on alleged addictive design features and inadequate safeguards to move forward.
• Increased exposure for platforms serving minors: Companies whose products are widely used by minors may face heightened scrutiny regarding age verification, parental controls, content labeling, and user safety tools.
• Broader risk considerations: Beyond social media companies, the case underscores the importance for organizations to evaluate how product features, engagement incentives, and safeguards may be viewed through the lens of consumer protection, public nuisance, or youth impact theories.
• Public entity plaintiffs gaining traction: School districts and other public entities may increasingly pursue litigation to recover costs associated with addressing resulting social and educational impacts of technology products.