A New Mexico judge has ordered Meta to pay $567 million (€523 million) after the state argued that the tech giant’s platforms created a public nuisance and exposed children to harm. The ruling, announced on Thursday, adds to a growing wave of legal scrutiny over how social media companies treat young users.
The penalty follows a jury verdict in March that found Meta liable for endangering children by making them vulnerable to predators on Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. In that earlier decision, the jury awarded $375 million in damages. The new judgment increases the total financial burden on the company, though Meta has said it will appeal.
“We disagree with the ruling and will appeal,” a Meta spokesperson said. “We work hard to keep people safe and have been transparent about the challenges of identifying and removing bad actors and harmful content.”
Allegations of algorithmic harm
New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez filed the lawsuit in 2023, accusing Meta of failing to shield minors from online dangers. During closing arguments, prosecutor Linda Singer told jurors that Meta’s algorithms actively directed adults toward content posted by teenage users, while the company concealed internal research about the risks to young people.
The jury concluded that Meta had violated the state’s Unfair Practices Act by misleading consumers about the safety of its platforms for children. Torrez framed the decision as a broader victory for families.
“This case has always been about protecting children, standing up for families, and making sure that one of the world’s largest technology companies cannot profit from practices that endanger young people without consequence,” Torrez said in a statement.
He added: “Today’s decision is a victory for every parent who has worried about what social media is doing to their child and every child who deserves to grow up safer online.”
How the funds will be used
Under the court order, roughly three-quarters of the $567 million must be directed toward mental health treatment, with payments spread over five years. The remaining balance will support programmes focused on awareness and prevention, screening and assessment, referral and coordination, as well as implementation and evaluation.
The case is part of a broader global conversation about the impact of social media on young people. In Europe, regulators have been tightening rules under the Digital Services Act, and several member states have launched their own investigations into platform safety. The New Mexico ruling may offer a reference point for European policymakers weighing similar penalties.
For parents and educators across the continent, the decision underscores the importance of recognising early signs of mental health struggles in children, a topic that has gained urgency as screen time rises. Meanwhile, the financial scale of the penalty sends a signal that courts are willing to hold tech giants accountable for systemic failures.
Meta’s appeal will likely focus on the legal definition of public nuisance and whether the state proved a direct causal link between its algorithms and specific harms. Similar cases in other US states are pending, and the outcome of this appeal could influence their trajectory.
For now, the ruling stands as one of the largest penalties ever imposed on a social media company for child safety violations. Whether it survives appeal remains to be seen, but the message to the industry is clear: the cost of neglecting young users is rising.
