New Mexico Jury Finds Meta Violated Unfair Practices Act and Orders $375 Million in Penalties for Harms to Children
A New Mexico jury found that Meta violated the state’s Unfair Practices Act (consumer‑protection law), committing thousands of violations that knowingly harmed children’s mental health and safety and ordered $375 million in civil penalties. Jurors concluded Meta misled the public and engaged in unconscionable trade practices—concealing what it knew about child sexual exploitation documented in a state undercover probe that posed as minors—while Meta says it will appeal; prosecutors and advocates call the verdict a landmark test case amid dozens of related state suits and a parallel federal trial.
📌 Key Facts
- A New Mexico jury found Meta violated the state Unfair Practices Act (state consumer‑protection law), ruling the company’s conduct harmed children’s mental health and safety and was 'unconscionable' because it exploited children’s vulnerabilities and inexperience.
- Jurors concluded Meta knowingly harmed children’s mental health, made false or misleading statements about platform safety, and concealed what it knew about child sexual exploitation on its services.
- The jury found Meta liable on all counts after a trial that lasted more than six weeks and assessed $375 million in civil penalties tied to thousands of alleged violations.
- The case relied heavily on a 2023 New Mexico undercover investigation in which state agents posed as children, created minor accounts, and documented rapid exposure to explicit content, sexual solicitations and the company’s responses.
- During the trial Meta executives rejected the label 'social‑media addiction' while acknowledging 'problematic use'; prosecutors argued the company prioritized profits over safety.
- Meta says it disagrees with the verdict and plans to appeal; company spokesperson Andy Stone (cited in coverage) expressed confidence in Meta’s record of protecting teens.
- New Mexico’s Department of Justice and multiple outlets frame the verdict as a landmark 'test case' for using state consumer‑protection laws against social‑media companies, and it comes amid more than 40 related state attorney‑general suits and a parallel federal trial in Southern California involving platform liability for youth harms.
📰 Source Timeline (6)
Follow how coverage of this story developed over time
March 24, 2026
11:34 PM
New Mexico jury finds Meta violated consumer protection law in child safety trial
New information:
- CBS segment format emphasizes that this is viewed as a 'landmark' child-safety trial victory against Meta by a state Department of Justice.
- It reinforces that the New Mexico Department of Justice (Attorney General’s office) is framing this as a test case for using state consumer-protection laws against social media platforms over harms to children.
- The piece highlights that Meta disputes the ruling and plans to appeal, signaling that this case will likely move into a prolonged appellate fight.
11:11 PM
New Mexico jury finds Meta committed thousands of violations that put children at risk
New information:
- Specifies Meta must pay $375 million in civil penalties tied to thousands of violations.
- Clarifies that the jury found Meta liable on all counts and that the trial lasted more than six weeks.
- Details that the case stemmed in part from a 2023 New Mexico undercover investigation creating minor accounts that were quickly exposed to explicit content and predatory behavior.
- Includes fresh Meta response from spokesperson Andy Stone stating the company will appeal and claiming confidence in its record of protecting teens.
- Notes a separate California jury in a similar case is currently deadlocked over allegations that Meta’s platforms are addictive and harmful to children’s mental health.
10:46 PM
New Mexico jury finds Meta violated protection law over exploitation claims
New information:
- This CBS piece emphasizes that jurors explicitly found Meta to be 'harmful to children's mental health' and that the company prioritized profits over safety.
- It clarifies that the jury agreed Meta made false or misleading statements and engaged in 'unconscionable' trade practices by exploiting children’s vulnerabilities and inexperience.
- The article notes that New Mexico’s undercover investigation involved agents posing as children to document sexual solicitations and Meta’s responses.
- It highlights that Meta executives at trial refused to concede 'social media addiction' exists but acknowledged 'problematic use.'
- It situates the New Mexico verdict alongside an ongoing, sequestered federal jury deliberation in Southern California over Meta and YouTube and references more than 40 state AG suits accusing Meta of contributing to a youth mental-health crisis.
10:12 PM
New Mexico jury says Meta harms children's mental health and safety, violating state law
New information:
- The NPR/AP piece explicitly states jurors found that Meta 'knowingly harmed children's mental health' and concealed what it knew about child sexual exploitation on its platforms.
- It clarifies that the jury agreed Meta’s conduct was 'unconscionable' because it unfairly took advantage of children’s vulnerabilities and inexperience, and that Meta made false or misleading statements about both mental‑health impacts and sexual‑exploitation dangers.
- The article explains that New Mexico’s case relied heavily on a state undercover investigation in which agents posed as children on Meta platforms to document sexual solicitations and the company’s response.
- It notes that Meta executives at trial rejected the term 'social media addiction' but acknowledged 'problematic use,' while prosecutors argued Meta prioritized profits over safety.
- The story situates the verdict alongside more than 40 other state attorneys general lawsuits against Meta and a parallel federal trial in California where a jury is already deliberating Meta and YouTube’s liability.
10:12 PM
Meta Endangered Children, Jury Finds in Landmark Verdict
New information:
- WSJ explicitly frames the case as 'among the first' to test whether social-media companies can be held responsible under state consumer-protection laws for harms from content on their platforms.
- WSJ emphasizes that the jury found Meta liable for 'misleading consumers about the safety of its platforms and endangering children,' highlighting deceptive safety messaging as central to the verdict.
- WSJ notes Meta has publicly stated it disagrees with the verdict and plans to appeal, via a company spokesperson.