New Mexico jury finds Meta liable in child-safety case, orders $375 million penalty
A New Mexico jury found that Meta harmed children’s mental health and safety and violated state law, delivering a verdict in a long-running legal fight over how social media platforms handle risks for minors. The decision came after a nearly seven-week trial in federal court in California, where jurors were sequestered for deliberations for more than a week.
Jurors sided with New Mexico prosecutors who argued that Meta—through platforms including Instagram, Facebook and WhatsApp—put profits ahead of safety and breached the state’s Unfair Practices Act. The jury also concluded that Meta made false or misleading statements related to child safety and engaged in “unconscionable” trade practices that, prosecutors said, unfairly exploited children’s vulnerabilities and inexperience.
The panel’s findings translated into a large monetary penalty. Jurors determined there were thousands of violations, with each violation counting separately toward penalties totaling $375 million, a figure reported as less than one-fifth of what prosecutors had sought.
Juror Linda Payton, 38, said the jury reached a compromise on the estimated number of teenagers affected by Meta’s platforms while still choosing the maximum penalty per violation. With a maximum $5,000 penalty for each violation, Payton said she believed each child was worth the maximum amount.
The verdict did not end the case. Meta’s practices were not immediately subject to a new order because the next step would be decided by a judge, not a jury. In a second phase scheduled for May, the court would determine whether the platforms created a public nuisance and whether Meta should pay for public programs intended to address the alleged harms.
Meta said it disagrees with the verdict and plans to appeal. A Meta spokesperson said the company works to keep people safe and said it is “clear about the challenges of identifying and removing bad actors or harmful content,” adding that the company will “continue to defend ourselves vigorously” and remains confident in its record protecting teens online. Attorneys for Meta told jurors that the company discloses risks and works to weed out harmful content, while acknowledging that some bad material can get through its safety systems.
Prosecutors and supporters of the state’s case pointed to the evidence presented at trial, including internal correspondence and reports about child safety. Jurors also heard testimony from Meta executives and platform engineers, whistleblowers who left the company, and psychiatric experts and tech safety consultants. The trial record also included testimony from local public school educators who described disruptions they linked to social media, including sextortion schemes targeting children.
Jurors were asked to evaluate whether social media users were misled by safety-related statements attributed to Meta and its leadership, including CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Instagram head Adam Mosseri and Meta global head of safety Antigone Davis. They also considered evidence tied to enforcement against users under 13, the role of algorithms in prioritizing sensational or harmful content, and the prevalence of social media content about teen suicide.
“We parents who have experienced the unimaginable — the death of a child because of social media harms — applaud this rare and momentous milestone in the years-long fight to hold Big Tech accountable for the dangers their products pose to our kids,” ParentsSOS said in a statement, calling the verdict a “watershed moment.”
The New Mexico case is part of a broader wave of litigation involving social media platforms and alleged harms to children, with more than 40 state attorneys general filing lawsuits against Meta alleging it has contributed to a youth mental health crisis by designing features that they say are addictive. In New Mexico’s case specifically, the lawsuit filed in 2023 by Attorney General Raúl Torrez relied on an undercover investigation in which agents created social media accounts posing as children to document sexual solicitations and Meta’s response. Prosecutors also argued that Meta still should be held responsible for how algorithms spread harmful content to children, even as Meta and its lawyers pointed to disclosures and efforts to remove bad actors.