Court orders Meta to pay an additional $567 million in New Mexico child safety case
In March, a jury in New Mexico found Meta legally responsible for breaching the state's consumer protection laws. The case, led by Attorney General Raúl Torrez, accused the company of endangering children and violating their safety. The first ruling required Meta to pay $375 million in civil penalties. A second phase of the trial followed, aiming to determine if the company caused public harm, particularly to teen users. After this phase, the court labeled Meta a 'public nuisance' due to its impact on children's well-being. This led to an order for Meta to pay an additional $567 million into a fund designated to support child safety and related programs in New Mexico.
Court's Ruling on Platform Use
The court's second ruling examined the broader implications of Meta's platform use. Judge Bryan Biedscheid compared Meta's social networks to industrial factories where the products are the advertisements and content shared by users. He argued that just as factories can emit harmful pollution, Meta's platforms generate psychological harm and sexual exploitation risks for children. These dangers do not remain confined to the digital world, spilling over into the wider internet and, most alarmingly, into real life. According to the judge, this spillover effect infringes on the public's right to a safe and reasonable digital environment, similar to the right to clean air and water.
Biedscheid's analogy of Meta as a factory was key to the court's argument that the company's harmful activities extend beyond its own ecosystem. He likened the social networks to manufacturing plants and the ads and user posts to the goods produced. The judge stated that these 'products' create pollution in the form of psychological damage and exploitative behavior toward children. This pollution spreads throughout the internet, influencing platforms beyond those operated by Meta, and ultimately affects the real world. The comparison was not only symbolic but also a legal tool to justify treating Meta's actions as a public nuisance. The judge clarified that the court's intention is not to shut down Meta's platforms. Instead, the goal is to address the existing damage and implement changes to reduce ongoing harm.
Meta's Response to Legal Actions
Meta has strongly resisted the court's demands, warning that the penalties might be so severe that it could consider withdrawing its apps from New Mexico entirely. In April, the company stated that the state's legal actions against it were so 'burdensome' that it might be forced to withdraw its apps from the state. Meta argued that the court's orders, especially the $567 million abatement fund and required platform modifications, could make it unfeasible to continue operating there. Attorney General Raúl Torrez dismissed Meta's threat as a PR stunt. He argued that Meta's core business interests far outweigh any potential short-term losses from complying with the court's decision. Torrez also emphasized that this case sets a precedent for holding companies accountable for the societal impact of their digital platforms.
The $567 million penalty will fund programs focused on child internet safety. These include youth internet safety training for teachers, school counselors, school psychologists and healthcare professionals. The funds will also support community-based health centers in providing digital safety education. Alongside the monetary penalty, the court mandated specific safety measures for Meta's platforms. These changes include a private-by-default setting for users under 18 on Instagram, restricting Facebook users under 18 to connect only with other minors, and limiting visibility of underage users in search results or recommendations unless identified by username. Additionally, these users must obtain parental or guardian consent—or proof of age—to change default privacy settings.
The platform must pause push notifications for these users between 10PM and 7AM every day and between 8AM and 3PM during the academic year, excluding weekends. Another key modification is hiding 'like counts' for users under 18 to reduce potential psychological harm. Meta must also enforce a mandatory usage time limit, allowing teens to spend no more than 90 hours per month across Facebook and Instagram. Additionally, the company must display daily information banners for underage users, educating them on safe practices and providing tools to report inappropriate content or behavior. The court's decision did not extend to changes in Meta's algorithms, despite the plaintiff's argument that they create harmful feedback loops on the platforms.