A New Mexico jury has found that Meta intentionally harmed children’s mental well-being and concealed information regarding child sexual exploitation on its social media platforms. This landmark ruling follows a nearly seven-week trial where jurors supported state prosecutors’ claim that Meta, the parent company of Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp, prioritized profits over safety. The jury concluded that Meta violated sections of the state’s Unfair Practices Act by concealing knowledge about the risks of child sexual exploitation on its platforms, as well as the adverse effects on children’s mental health. They also determined that Meta engaged in unfair trade practices that exploited the vulnerabilities and inexperience of children.
The jury identified thousands of violations, with each violation contributing to a penalty of $375 million US. In response to the verdict, a Meta spokesperson stated, “We respectfully disagree with the verdict and will appeal. We work diligently to ensure the safety of individuals on our platforms and acknowledge the challenges of identifying and removing harmful content or bad actors.”
New Mexico’s case is part of a series of legal actions against social media platforms for their impact on children. The trial, which commenced on February 9, is one of the initial lawsuits against Meta, coinciding with calls from school districts and lawmakers for stricter regulations on smartphone usage in classrooms. Another trial in a California federal court involves deliberations on whether Meta and YouTube should be held accountable for harm caused to children on their platforms, setting a precedent for similar lawsuits.
Furthermore, over 40 state attorneys general have filed lawsuits against Meta, alleging that the company’s design of Instagram and Facebook features contributes to a mental health crisis among young individuals. The New Mexico case, initiated by State Attorney General Raul Torrez in 2023, also asserts that Meta has not fully disclosed or addressed the risks of social media addiction. While Meta denies the existence of social media addiction, trial executives acknowledged instances of “problematic use” and emphasized their desire for users to have a positive experience on their platforms.
Tech companies have historically been shielded from liability under Section 230 of the U.S. Communications Decency Act and First Amendment protections. However, New Mexico prosecutors argue that Meta should be held responsible for disseminating harmful content through complex algorithms that can negatively impact children. The trial is expected to proceed to a second phase, potentially in May, before a judge without a jury to determine if Meta created a public nuisance and mandate corrective actions and compensation for damages.
The New Mexico trial scrutinized internal communications and reports from Meta concerning child safety, as well as testimonies from Meta executives, platform engineers, whistleblowers, psychiatric experts, and tech safety consultants. Local educators also testified about challenges related to social media disruptions, including schemes targeting children. State Chief Deputy Attorney General James Grayson emphasized in closing arguments that the case revolves around a major tech company exploiting New Mexico teenagers.
During deliberations, the jury assessed whether social media users were misled by specific safety assurances from Meta’s CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Instagram head Adam Mosseri, and Meta’s global head of safety Antigone Davis. Jurors considered a checklist of allegations from prosecutors, including Meta’s failure to disclose information about enforcing bans on users under 13, the prevalence of social media content related to teen suicide, and the role of Meta algorithms in promoting harmful content.
