March 2026 spelled serious trouble for Big Tech companies as juries in New Mexico and California found social media giants Meta and YouTube liable for negligent product design and unfair and deceptive trade practices in landmark cases set to reverberate throughout the industry.
The New Mexico case—which resulted in a staggering $375 million judgment against Meta —began in late 2023 when New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez sued the social media company for violating New Mexico’s Unfair Practices Act and for creating a public nuisance by “knowingly expos[ing] children to the twin dangers of sexual exploitation and mental health harm” on the company’s Facebook and Instagram platforms.
The complaint, now partly redacted, cited six case studies of law enforcement operations the state argued demonstrated a pattern of Meta steering child users to harmful content. In one case study, law enforcement created a fake Facebook profile of a 40-year-old fictional “bad mother” whose profile signaled her interest in trafficking her fictional 13-year-old daughter. Police took no further action to promote the profile, but within three days, the profile had reached the maximum number of Facebook friends allowable (5,000) and had amassed some 3,000 followers. Police also created a profile for the fictional mother’s daughter, “Issa.” Through Issa’s profile, police reported to Facebook that Issa had been placed in a group chat where adult men shared videos and photographs of nude underage girls. After numerous reports, Facebook simply instructed Issa to leave the group chat. Most of Issa’s followers were men between 18 and 40 years old, and, according to the complaint, Issa’s Facebook Messenger chats were “filled with pictures and videos of genitalia.”
The state alleged that a wide range of Facebook features, from “endless scroll” to push notifications, constituted unfair trade practices under New Mexico law, given their tendency to promote misuse of and addiction to the platform among youth, and to facilitate sexual predators’ access to minor victims. The state also alleged that Meta knew users were using Facebook and Instagram to share child sexual abuse material (“CSAM”) and to locate victims for sex trafficking but failed to take appropriate remedial measures.
In depositions taken during the New Mexico litigation, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and head of Instagram Adam Mosseri characterized abuse of their platforms as inevitable given their broad user bases. Zuckerberg stated that he recognized the importance of combatting the criminal misuse of Meta platforms, but further stated, “I don’t think that the standard for our platforms would be that you should assume that it will ever be perfect.” Mosseri echoed similar sentiments, stating, “[w]e’re connecting billions of people. That is going to mean good and bad things happen.”
Meta’s loss in New Mexico came exactly one day before a California jury announced Meta and Google would be held liable in a products liability case filed by a California woman, who alleged the social media companies intentionally designed their platforms to cause addiction. The plaintiff alleged she became addicted to social media as a child, and that her compulsive use of YouTube and Facebook resulted in depression and anxiety. The jury awarded the plaintiff $3,000,000 in compensatory damages and $3,000,000 in punitive damages, finding Meta and Google (owner of YouTube) acted with “malice, oppression, or fraud.” While a $6,000,000 judgment may seem negligible for two multi-billion dollar tech companies, the California case has been described as an important “bellwether” for nearly 1,500 similar cases pending against Big Tech defendants.
The California suit represents a clever litigation tactic; by targeting the design of Facebook and YouTube rather than the content posted on the websites, the plaintiffs were able to prevent the defendants from successfully invoking Section 230 immunity, which prevents providers of interactive computer services from being held liable for content posted by users.
The CSE Institute commends New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez and the California plaintiffs for challenging Big Tech on the important issues of social media addiction, online child sex trafficking, and the widespread dissemination of CSAM.
As we’ve previously reported, social media touches on every stage of the sex trafficking cycle. Sexual predators often first gain access to their victims through social media and then constantly monitor their victims’ social media activity to maintain control. Social media platforms also provide an easy medium for sex traffickers to distribute non-consensual intimate images (a/k/a “revenge porn”) to maintain control over their victims and, in some instances, profit from their exploitation.
We encourage attorneys to find novel legal theories, such as products liability, that circumvent the roadblock of Section 230 immunity. We further urge Congress to sunset or amend Section 230. For instance, Congress could replace the blanket immunity currently afforded to social media companies with a qualified “safe harbor,” accessible only if the platform has an adequate system in place to receive notice of harmful material and promptly remove it. Only when social media companies are held accountable and required to pay for the harm caused by their platforms will they be incentivized to take remedial action.
All views expressed herein are personal to the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law or of Villanova University.