Meta Platforms Inc. Has been ordered to pay $375 million in damages for violating New Mexico law, a figure lower than the roughly $2 billion sought by New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez, who initiated the legal proceedings.
The social media giant announced its intention to appeal the decision within minutes of the verdict being delivered, according to a company spokesperson.
“We work hard to keep people safe on our platforms and are transparent about the challenges of identifying and removing malicious users and harmful content,” the spokesperson added.
Attorney General Torrez filed suit against Meta in late 2023, alleging the company endangered children by exposing them to inappropriate content and sexual predators. The case centers on claims that Meta violated state consumer protection laws and misled residents regarding the safety of platforms like Facebook and Instagram.
“New Mexico is proud to be the first state to hold social media companies accountable for deceiving parents, enabling the exploitation of children, and endangering young people,” Torrez stated in a press release.
Torrez believes the awarded damages “should send a clear message to tech executives” that “no company is above the law.”
“This is a turning point for all parents concerned about what might happen to their children when they go online,” he concluded, “and this victory is theirs.”
New Legal Strategy
The jury reached a decision after less than a day of deliberation, following six weeks of testimony.
The $2 billion initially requested by the Attorney General was calculated based on the number of monthly users of Facebook and Instagram under the age of 18 in New Mexico – approximately 200,000 individuals.
During closing arguments on Monday, Linda Singer, representing the state, accused Meta of deceptively communicating about its protections for minors. She also criticized the company for encouraging excessive use of its platforms by young users, despite knowing the potential consequences.
This line of reasoning mirrors arguments presented in a separate trial in Los Angeles against Meta and Google, where jurors are continuing deliberations for a ninth day.
In the California case, a young woman is seeking damages from both tech giants, alleging they intentionally designed their applications to maximize user engagement among young people. She claims that frequent use of Instagram and YouTube, subsidiaries of Meta and Google respectively, contributed to her depression, anxiety, and body image issues.
Until recently, social media operators were largely shielded from liability for user-generated content through Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
Both in Santa Fe and Los Angeles, plaintiffs have adopted a new legal strategy, focusing on the design of the platforms themselves, rather than the content they host, and the lack of preventative measures against potential dangers – a tactic successfully employed against the tobacco industry.
The Los Angeles trial, like the New Mexico case, is considered a significant test for the future of hundreds of similar pending lawsuits across the United States.
Prior to the verdict, a Meta spokesperson maintained that the prosecution “did not prove its case,” and reiterated the company’s commitment to protecting teenagers online. Following the decision, the spokesperson stated, “We will continue to vigorously defend and remain confident in our standards regarding the protection of adolescents online.”
Beyond the appeal process, the case will enter a second phase to examine the Attorney General’s claim that Meta engaged in conduct constituting a public nuisance.
