Unfavorable verdicts could cost Meta billions.
Two juries are currently deliberating cases that could either lead to a legal reckoning for Meta or maintain the status quo as efforts to impose changes or penalties on tech platforms in court continue. In New Mexico, a jury heard closing arguments in a trial where Meta is accused of facilitating child predators on its platforms, claims the company denies. Separately, a Los Angeles jury is expected to soon reach a verdict on whether Meta and Google should be liable for making defective products that allegedly addicted a young woman. Unfavorable outcomes for Meta could result in damages and penalties exceeding $2 billion and invite more legal challenges.
Meta and other tech platforms face numerous trials this year. Facebook and Instagram, often criticized for failing to protect children online, are at the forefront. Meta argues harming users isn’t beneficial for business. According to spokesperson Andy Stone, Meta is committed to supporting young people and strongly disagrees with allegations in the California lawsuits. The Los Angeles jury has deliberated for over a week following a five-week trial.
In the New Mexico case, attorney Linda Singer argued Meta failed to protect young people and misled the public about safety. Evidence included Meta’s internal discussions and undercover operations. Singer suggested Meta’s algorithm could be programmed to prioritize safety and integrity, likening current safety features to adding a filter to a cigarette without changing its fundamental nature.
Juries in both trials heard similar evidence, including testimony from former Meta employees about internal safety concerns. Singer highlighted Meta’s failure to prevent kids under 13 from using its platform, citing an elementary school principal who noted many of her students were on Instagram.
New Mexico attorneys presented evidence from investigations resulting in arrests of three suspected child predators. Decoy accounts posing as minors were inundated with inappropriate interactions from adults. Meta allegedly flagged policy violations but didn’t act until after arrests were announced.
Meta attorney Kevin Huff argued Meta disclosed safety system limits and acted when possible, while the state focused on selective evidence. Huff claimed New Mexico’s investigators used “hacked and stolen accounts” and questioned the authenticity of the experiences. Singer rebutted, stating decoy accounts were not hacked but AI-generated images.
Overcoming Section 230 protection for third-party content liability is a challenge for plaintiffs. Singer emphasized Meta’s misrepresentation regarding harmful content awareness. Huff referenced Section 230 protections and questioned the state’s misrepresentation claims.
Singer urged the jury to impose maximum penalties under New Mexico law if Meta misled the public and engaged in unethical trade practices. Huff argued the state’s claims lacked evidence, stating there was no basis for penalties based on speculative figures of users under 18.