Jurors wade through daunting evidence in high-stakes Meta trial about social media risks to children
SANTA FE, New Mexico — A stunning flood of testimony and evidence has been presented in a New Mexico case that explores what social media conglomerate Meta knew about the effects of its platforms on children.
State prosecutors say Meta failed to disclose the risks its platforms posed to children, including mental health issues and sexual exploitation. Meta’s lawyers said the company had built-in protections for teens and removed harmful content, but acknowledged that some harmful content escaped its safety nets.
The trial is approaching its seventh week. The jurors are not yet deliberating. But if they find that Meta — which owns Instagram, Facebook and WhatsApp — violated New Mexico’s consumer protection laws, prosecutors say the penalties could run into billions of dollars. Meta says, however, that it would seek to perform a different calculation.
The trial that began Feb. 9 is one of the first in a series of lawsuits against Meta and comes as school districts and lawmakers seek more restrictions on smartphone use in classrooms.
A second phase of the trial, possibly scheduled for May before a judge without a jury, would determine whether Meta created a public nuisance with its social media platforms and should fund public programs to address the problem.
Here’s what you need to know about the possible results of the trial:
Meta faces three counts of violating New Mexico’s Unfair Trade Practices Act, which protects consumers from deceptive or predatory business practices.
After closing arguments, jurors will evaluate whether Meta knowingly misrepresented the risks on its platforms – at least by omission or active concealment.
The case could circumvent or challenge immunity provisions that shield tech companies from liability for material posted on their social media platforms under Section 230, a 30-year-old provision of the U.S. Communications Decency Act, as well as a First Amendment shield.
In California, a jury is already deliberating whether social media companies should be liable for harm to children using their platforms, in one of three landmark court cases that could pave the way for thousands of similar lawsuits.
The New Mexico case has a different basis, including an undercover state investigation in which agents created social media accounts posing as children to document Meta’s sexual solicitations and response.
The lawsuit, filed in 2023 by New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez, also says the dangers of social media addiction were not fully disclosed or addressed by Meta. Meta disagrees that social media addiction exists, but executives acknowledge “problematic use” and say they want people to feel good about the time they spend on Meta’s platforms.
Among thousands of pages of documents, the New Mexico lawsuit examines a series of meta-documents and internal communications. Jurors also heard testimony from Meta executives, platform engineers, whistleblowers who left the company, psychiatric experts and technology security consultants.
The jury could also be swayed by testimony from local public school educators who have faced social media-related disruptions, including the exchange of violent and sexually explicit images, as well as sextortion schemes targeting children in New Mexico.
The two additional counts of consumer protection violations allege that Meta engaged in “unconscionable” business practices that were patently unfair.
In opening statements, prosecutor Donald Migliori highlighted accusations that Meta impermissibly targeted children’s social media engagement as a source of long-term profit, despite knowing that children were at risk of sexual exploitation on social media. Meta disputes this argument by highlighting the platform’s safety features and content filters aimed at teens, who are seen by Meta as trendsetters with limited purchasing power to satisfy advertisers.
The jury would decide whether the conduct was “willful” and merit civil penalties of up to $5,000 per violation, and could help calculate the number of violations.
Torrez says those penalties could add up, given how many people in New Mexico use Meta’s platforms. Meta, however, called for capping these penalties at one penalty per misrepresentation or fair trading violation – not per number of views or users on social media.
State District Judge Bryan Biedscheid is overseeing both phases of the trial. It would decide nuisance allegations as the case moves forward — and determine whether the company is financially obligated to repair the damage.
Prosecutors accused Meta of negligently creating a market and “breeding ground” for predators who target children for sexual exploitation. They say Meta’s platforms also harm teens’ mental health in a variety of ways – from lack of sleep and depression to self-harm.
Meta’s lawyers accuse prosecutors of cherry-picking evidence as well as doing shoddy investigative work that could have made the situation worse.
At the trial, Meta executives described robust systems for detecting child pornography on its platforms and notifying law enforcement, but said the company also warns users that its enforcement is not flawless.
“We think it’s important to disclose risks, but to do so consistently and rigorously,” said Adam Mosseri, head of Instagram, describing a philosophy that extends to blog posts, service agreements and more.
In a video deposition played during the trial, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said that “security is extremely important to the service and it requires people to have trust and want to use it over time.” He said Meta stopped in 2017 directly linking business performance goals to the extended time users spent on its platforms.
Torrez says he will seek court-ordered relief to force Meta to change the way it does business and address the harm caused to children by social media.
“We will invest significantly in strategic programs targeted at how you use the Internet and social media in a responsible and healthy way,” he said on the opening day of the trial.
