Meta Hit With $375M Verdict After New Mexico Jury Finds It Misleads Teens on Safety

A Santa Fe jury concluded that Meta knowingly harmed New Mexico teens’ mental health and deliberately hid from parents and users what it knew about child sexual exploitation on Facebook and Instagram. Jurors checked “liable” on every count, ruling that the company engaged in “unfair and deceptive” and “unconscionable” trade practices under the state’s Unfair Practices Act. The panel found thousands of discrete violations, one for each time the platforms were served to New Mexico minors without proper warnings. The verdict is the first jury decision in the U.S. holding a social-media firm civilly responsible for child-safety failures.

The court immediately imposed a $375 million civil penalty—the maximum allowed under New Mexico law for repeated violations. The award is not compensatory; it is a pure fine meant to punish Meta and deter similar conduct. Because the jury found thousands of violations, the per-incident fine is modest, but the aggregate figure is among the largest ever assessed against a tech company in a child-safety case. The money goes to the state’s general fund and is earmarked for future consumer-protection enforcement.

Prosecutors argued that Meta’s algorithms, infinite scroll, like-count displays, friend-suggestion tools, and direct-messaging defaults created what they called a “marketplace for predators.” Evidence showed that teens who spent more than three hours a day on Instagram had higher rates of self-harm and that one in three young users developed “problematic use” patterns. The state also introduced internal emails in which Meta employees acknowledged that younger users were at risk but decided against adding friction features that might reduce engagement.

Legal scholars say the verdict gives a roadmap to other state attorneys general. Because New Mexico’s consumer-protection statute is similar to laws in at least 25 states, and because the same design features are deployed worldwide, plaintiffs’ lawyers are already drafting complaints. Meta itself disclosed in SEC filings that it faces “multiple ongoing and potential” child-safety suits. Apple, TikTok, and Snap are watching closely; their platforms employ comparable engagement mechanics.

Meta called the decision “disappointing” and vowed to appeal on First Amendment and federal pre-emption grounds. In a statement, the company maintained that it has introduced more than 30 safety tools since 2021, including parental supervision dashboards and AI-powered nudity detection. It argues that state-law penalties cannot override Section 230 immunity, a question likely to reach the U.S. Supreme Court. Meanwhile, Meta continues to roll out teen accounts with built-in limits and says it will “vigorously defend” its record.

The trial judge still must rule on post-trial motions and set a bond while the appeal proceeds. If the verdict survives, New Mexico can seek additional injunctive relief—forcing design changes or ongoing monitoring. A separate federal MDL (multidistrict litigation) in California covering similar claims by school districts is on hold pending the appeal. Observers expect a final decision to take two to four years, with settlement talks likely once the appellate posture becomes clearer.