A New Mexico jury found Meta liable Tuesday for violating the state's consumer protection law by endangering children and concealing what it knew about child sexual exploitation on its platforms. The verdict came after nearly seven weeks of trial and less than a day of deliberations, marking the first time a jury has ruled against Meta on child exploitation claims. Jurors determined that Meta prioritized profits over safety and engaged in "unconscionable" trade practices that took advantage of children's vulnerability and inexperience.
The jury ordered Meta to pay $375 million in civil penalties. Jurors found thousands of separate violations, each counting toward the total.
New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez brought the case in 2023, relying partly on an undercover investigation where state agents created social media accounts posing as children to document sexual solicitations and Meta's response. The trial examined Meta's internal correspondence and reports related to child safety, and jurors heard testimony from Meta executives, platform engineers, whistleblowers who left the company, psychiatric experts, and tech-safety consultants.
Prosecutors argued that Meta made false or misleading statements about platform safety and failed to disclose what it knew about problems enforcing its ban on users under 13, the prevalence of content about teen suicide, and the role of Meta algorithms in prioritizing sensational or harmful content. Prosecution attorney Linda Singer told jurors that Meta's choice to optimize for engagement and time spent by children "has profound negative impacts on kids." State Chief Deputy Attorney General James Grayson framed the case directly: "What this case is about is one of the biggest tech companies in the world taking advantage of New Mexico teens."
Meta's attorneys argued the company discloses risks and makes efforts to remove harmful content, while acknowledging that some bad material gets through its safety net. Kevin Huff, a Meta attorney, told jurors in closing arguments that "Meta designs its apps to help people connect with friends and family, not to try to connect predators."
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg testified in a separate federal trial in California, acknowledging that while users under 13 are not allowed on Instagram, the rule is difficult to enforce because "a meaningful number of people who lie about their age to use our services."
Meta spokesperson Andy Stone said the company "respectfully disagree[s] with the verdict and will appeal." The company stated it works hard to keep people safe and remains confident in its record of protecting teens online.
The jury awarded $375 million, a fraction of the $2.2 billion maximum that prosecutors sought. Meta is currently valued at about $1.5 trillion, and its stock rose in the hours after the verdict, signaling investor indifference to the penalty. Nevertheless, Torrez called the verdict "a historic victory for every child and family who has paid the price for Meta's choice to put profits over kids' safety," adding that the damages should send a message that "no company is beyond the reach of the law."
A second phase of the trial, scheduled possibly for May, will proceed before a judge without a jury to determine whether Meta created a public nuisance and may be ordered to change course and pay for remedies. Torrez said his office will ask the court to force Meta to make changes and impose additional financial penalties.
More than 40 state attorneys general have filed lawsuits claiming Meta deliberately designed Instagram and Facebook features to be addictive, contributing to a mental health crisis among young people. In federal court in California, another jury has been sequestered for more than a week deliberating whether Meta and YouTube should be liable in one of three bellwether cases that could set the course for thousands of similar lawsuits.
A New Mexico jury found Meta liable Tuesday for violating the state's consumer protection law by endangering children and concealing what it knew about child sexual exploitation on its platforms. The verdict came after nearly seven weeks of trial and less than a day of deliberations, marking the first time a jury has ruled against Meta on child exploitation claims. Jurors determined that Meta prioritized profits over safety and engaged in "unconscionable" trade practices that took advantage of children's vulnerability and inexperience.
The jury ordered Meta to pay $375 million in civil penalties. Jurors found thousands of separate violations, each counting toward the total, with one juror, Linda Payton, revealing the jury reached a compromise on the estimated number of teenagers affected while opting for the maximum penalty per violation of $5,000.
New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez brought the case in 2023, relying partly on an undercover investigation where state agents created social media accounts posing as children to document sexual solicitations and Meta's response. The trial examined Meta's internal correspondence and reports related to child safety, and jurors heard testimony from Meta executives, platform engineers, whistleblowers who left the company, psychiatric experts, and tech-safety consultants.
Prosecutors argued that Meta made false or misleading statements about platform safety and failed to disclose what it knew about problems enforcing its ban on users under 13, the prevalence of content about teen suicide, and the role of Meta algorithms in prioritizing sensational or harmful content. Prosecution attorney Linda Singer told jurors that Meta's choice to optimize for engagement and time spent by children "has profound negative impacts on kids." State Chief Deputy Attorney General James Grayson framed the case directly: "What this case is about is one of the biggest tech companies in the world taking advantage of New Mexico teens."
Meta's attorneys argued the company discloses risks and makes efforts to remove harmful content, while acknowledging that some bad material gets through its safety net. Kevin Huff, a Meta attorney, told jurors in closing arguments that "Meta designs its apps to help people connect with friends and family, not to try to connect predators." Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg testified in the trial, acknowledging that while users under 13 are not allowed on Instagram, the rule is difficult to enforce because "a meaningful number of people who lie about their age to use our services."
Meta spokesperson Andy Stone said the company "respectfully disagree[s] with the verdict and will appeal." The company stated it works hard to keep people safe and remains confident in its record of protecting teens online.
The jury awarded $375 million, a fraction of the $2.2 billion maximum that prosecutors sought. Meta is currently valued at about $1.5 trillion, and its stock rose in the hours after the verdict, signaling investor indifference to the penalty. Nevertheless, Torrez called the verdict "a historic victory for every child and family who has paid the price for Meta's choice to put profits over kids' safety," adding that the damages should send a message that "no company is beyond the reach of the law."
A second phase of the trial, scheduled possibly for May, will proceed before a judge without a jury to determine whether Meta created a public nuisance and may be ordered to change course and pay for remedies. Torrez said his office will ask the court to force Meta to make changes and impose additional financial penalties.
The New Mexico case is one of the first to reach trial in a wave of litigation against Meta. More than 40 state attorneys general have filed lawsuits claiming Meta deliberately designed Instagram and Facebook features to be addictive, contributing to a mental health crisis among young people. In federal court in California, another jury has been sequestered for more than a week deliberating whether Meta and YouTube should be liable in one of three bellwether cases that could set the course for thousands of similar lawsuits.
Highlighted text was flagged by the council. Tap to see feedback.
The sources also report that one juror, Linda Payton, said the jury reached a compromise on the estimated number of teenagers affected while opting for the maximum penalty per violation of $5,000.