Back-to-back verdicts against Meta may signal trouble ahead for tech giants
The first shot in a wave of legal battles targeting social media companies and their child‑safety protections concluded on Tuesday, March 24, 2026, when a New Mexico jury returned a major verdict against Meta. A day later, a separate California jury found Meta and YouTube liable in another landmark case over allegedly addictive design features and awarded $3 million in pain‑and‑suffering damages.
In the first case, a jury awarded $375 million in civil penalties in a suit brought in 2023 by New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez against social media giant Meta. The jury found thousands of violations of the state’s Unfair Practices Act based on allegations that Meta’s platforms hid the dangers of child sexual exploitation and harmful content linked to children’s mental health issues. In the second, a California jury found that both Meta and YouTube were negligent in a bellwether trial that could lead to future settlements.
As other social media trials work their way through the legal system, legal arguments around the protections under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act are increasingly being tested — and for many plaintiffs, that appears to be part of the goal.
I’m Very Big on TikTok and the ‘Gram
There are many popular platforms available, but Meta stands above most competitors in sheer scale. Its family of platforms — including Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp — collectively reaches roughly 3 billion monthly active users. For many users, social media is a primary way to express opinions and engage with their communities.
However, it’s not all birthday wishes and smiley-face emojis. Meta’s platforms have long been criticized on a variety of fronts, including valuing profits and algorithms over combating hate speech and children’s safety. Security measures in place to deter sexual predators from using social media as fertile hunting grounds for vulnerable young people are often decried as lacking in substance or woefully underenforced.
Online platforms like Meta operate under Section 230 protections, which generally grant them immunity for third‑party content posted by users on their sites. The suit brought by New Mexico might be the first of its kind to end with a massive jury award, but it’s far from the only current civil complaint targeting Meta and other companies for their policies rather than focusing on the actual content itself.
Armed with internal emails among Meta executives, educators' testimony about classroom disruptions, whistleblower accounts, and other evidence, the New Mexico legal team focused on alleged violations of the state’s Unfair Practices Act. The state argued that Meta concealed what it knew about the risks of child sexual exploitation and mental health harms to young users and made false or misleading statements about the impact and safety of its platforms for minors.
The state also challenged Instagram’s enforcement of its age policies, which are supposed to bar users under 13 from the platform. Prosecutors accused Instagram and Meta of prioritizing more profitable policies that enabled adults to contact underage users, made it easier for children to find harmful content, and downplayed links between the platforms and teen suicide, conduct they framed as “unconscionable trade practices.” Although Meta argued throughout the roughly seven‑week trial that it is doing its best to protect kids’ safety, the jury was not persuaded.
Not What They Want To Be Trending For
More bad news arrived on March 25, as another landmark case did not go Meta’s way. After about a week of deliberations, a Los Angeles jury awarded $3 million in pain‑and‑suffering damages to a 20‑year‑old woman who said Meta and YouTube designed their platforms to be as addictive as online gambling or cigarettes; Meta is responsible for 70% of the award and YouTube for 30%. The California jury is still weighing whether to impose punitive damages as well.
Even that’s only the tip of the legal iceberg. In addition to other pending lawsuits, Meta is facing a complaint in federal court from over 30 state attorneys general that alleges the company intended to help minors become addicted to their products. Other attorneys general have filed similar lawsuits in state courts.
Appeal or not, New Mexico isn’t quite finished with Meta just yet. An additional phase is scheduled to begin in May, with a bench trial to determine if the social media giant created a public nuisance. It seems unlikely that executives at either Instagram or Facebook will click the “like” button about that.
Related Resources
- Social Media Privacy Laws (FindLaw’s Online Scams and Consumer Laws)
- Understanding the Legal Issues for Social Media Sites and Their Users (FindLaw’s Modern Law Practice)
- How Meta Beat Antitrust Allegations and What It Means for Tech Companies (FindLaw’s Courtside)
