Back-to-Back Jury Verdicts Find Meta Negligent and Liable for Child Safety Failures as More Than 2,000 Lawsuits Await
A New Mexico jury ordered Meta to pay $375 million for enabling child exploitation, and a California bellwether jury found both Meta and YouTube negligent in designing addictive platforms that harmed a minor.
Overview
Two jury verdicts handed down within 48 hours have opened a new legal front against Meta Platforms over the safety of children on its products. On March 24, a Santa Fe jury ordered Meta to pay $375 million in civil penalties for violating New Mexico’s consumer protection law by concealing evidence of child sexual exploitation on Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, according to NBC News. The following day, a separate jury in Los Angeles found both Meta and YouTube negligent in the design of their platforms, awarding $6 million in compensatory and punitive damages to a young woman who said the services fueled depression, anxiety, and body dysmorphia beginning when she was a child, as reported by ABC News.
Taken together, the verdicts mark the first time U.S. juries have held major social media companies liable for harms to minors, and they set the stage for thousands of additional cases working their way through the courts.
The New Mexico Verdict
The six-week New Mexico trial centered on a 2023 undercover operation by Attorney General Raúl Torrez’s office. Investigators created fake accounts on Facebook and Instagram posing as users under 14. Those profiles were quickly inundated with sexually explicit material and contact from adults, according to NBC News. Multiple individuals were subsequently charged.
The state argued that Meta publicly represented its platforms as safe while possessing internal documents acknowledging sexual exploitation and mental health harms. Prosecutors alleged the company failed to implement basic safeguards such as age verification, and deliberately designed features like infinite scroll and auto-play video to maximize engagement despite knowing those features harmed children.
The jury found Meta’s conduct “unconscionable” and assessed the maximum penalty under state law of $5,000 per violation, totaling $375 million. Although that figure fell short of the roughly $2 billion the state had sought, Attorney General Torrez called it “a historic victory for every child and family” harmed by Meta’s practices, according to ABC News.
A second phase of the case is scheduled for May 4, when a judge will consider whether Meta created a public nuisance and could be ordered to implement specific platform changes and fund remedial programs, as reported by ABC News.
The California Bellwether
One day after the New Mexico verdict, a Los Angeles jury found Meta and YouTube negligent in the design or operation of their platforms in a case brought by a 20-year-old plaintiff identified as Kaley. She alleged that she began using YouTube at age six and Instagram around age nine, and that social media addiction led to depression, anxiety, body dysmorphia, and suicidal thoughts, according to ABC News.
The jury awarded $3 million in compensatory damages and $3 million in punitive damages, splitting responsibility 70 percent to Meta and 30 percent to YouTube, as reported by CNBC.
The California case was designated as a bellwether, a test trial intended to guide the resolution of approximately 2,000 similar lawsuits brought by parents and school districts across the country, according to Axios.
What We Don’t Know
The long-term financial exposure for Meta remains unclear. The combined $381 million in penalties from both cases represents a fraction of the company’s $201 billion in annual revenue, according to Fortune. However, attorneys general in more than 40 states have filed similar suits, and Meta’s own regulatory filings acknowledge that pending lawsuits seek damages in the tens of billions of dollars, as reported by Fortune.
Whether the verdicts will survive appeal is also uncertain. Meta has stated it will appeal both decisions, arguing that its platforms maintain robust safety disclosures and that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act shields it from liability for user-generated content. Legal analysts cited by Fortune note that Section 230 continues to limit broader liability exposure, though the New Mexico case was brought under state consumer protection statutes rather than content-liability theories.
It is also unclear whether the verdicts will compel meaningful changes to platform design. The May bench trial in New Mexico could produce injunctive relief mandating age verification and algorithmic modifications, but any such orders would likely face further legal challenge.
Looking Ahead
The two verdicts arrive as the U.S. Congress has moved toward federal children’s online safety legislation, and as European regulators tighten enforcement of the Digital Services Act. Whether through legislation, regulation, or the accumulating weight of jury findings, the legal environment for social media companies and their obligations to younger users is shifting rapidly.