Judge Bryan Biedscheid issued the ruling Thursday following the second phase of a lawsuit brought by the State of New Mexico. The order directs $420 million toward treatment services for young people, with the remaining funds allocated for prevention programs, public awareness campaigns, screening services and related initiatives over the next five years.

The remedies phase followed a March jury verdict that found Meta knowingly harmed children’s mental health and concealed information regarding child sexual exploitation on its platforms. During the first phase of the case, jurors ordered the company to pay $375 million in civil penalties.

Court Orders Additional Safety Measures

The ruling requires Meta to introduce new safety features on Facebook and Instagram for users in New Mexico.

Among the required measures are recurring banner notifications and informational screens explaining available child safety tools, privacy settings, best practices and options for reporting inappropriate content and comments. The educational materials and related platform changes will be subject to review by New Mexico officials.

During the remedies phase, state prosecutors sought broader reforms intended to reduce addictive platform features, strengthen age verification and improve protections against child sexual exploitation through enhanced privacy settings and increased oversight.

Federal Law Limits Mandatory Age Verification

Judge Biedscheid ruled that federal privacy law prevents the court from requiring Meta to mandate age verification for children younger than 13.

According to the ruling, the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) prohibits companies from collecting additional personal information or passively tracking children solely to verify their ages. The court also concluded that imposing such a requirement only on Meta, while exempting competing social media platforms, would be inequitable and place an undue burden on the company.

Instead, the court ordered Meta to continue improving its age assurance technology in New Mexico. The company currently uses artificial intelligence to estimate users’ ages based on signals including social connections and the types of content users view and share.

The ruling also directs Meta to develop a dedicated predictive model within two years to better identify users believed to be younger than 13.

New Requirements for Underage Users

Under the order, Meta must request proof of age from New Mexico users whom its systems estimate are younger than 13.

If the company determines that a user is under 13—or believes a user is under 18 without being able to determine a more precise age—it must apply protections appropriate to those age groups until the user’s age has been verified.

The ruling also requires Meta to work with schools or a child safety organization to establish a reporting portal that allows school personnel to report users who may be under 13. In addition, the company must delete personal information collected from users identified as being younger than 13.

Judge Biedscheid ordered Meta to file compliance reports twice each year detailing its progress in implementing the court’s requirements.

The Associated Press reported that it contacted both the New Mexico Department of Justice and Meta for comment following the ruling. Neither had publicly responded at the time of publication.

This report is based on reporting by The Associated Press.

The post Meta Ordered to Pay $567 Million as New Mexico Court Expands Child Safety Measures appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

According to reporting by the Associated Press, the jury awarded $3 million in damages to a 20-year-old plaintiff, identified as KGM, after concluding that both platforms were negligently designed in ways that contributed to compulsive use beginning in childhood. Jurors also recommended an additional $3 million in punitive damages, subject to judicial review.

The ruling represents one of the first cases in which a jury has directly linked platform design choices—rather than user-generated content—to measurable harm, potentially reshaping how courts evaluate liability in the digital economy.

Platform Design Practices Face Intensifying Legal Scrutiny

At the center of the case were product features widely used across social media ecosystems, including infinite scrolling feeds, autoplay video functions, and persistent notifications. Plaintiffs argued these mechanisms were intentionally engineered to maximize user engagement, particularly among minors, without sufficient safeguards.

The jury found that both companies were aware of potential risks to younger users and failed to adequately warn or mitigate those risks. Under California civil standards, a majority of jurors agreed that these design elements were a “substantial factor” in causing harm, even without proving they were the sole cause.

Legal experts say the verdict could accelerate efforts to reinterpret platform accountability beyond protections provided by Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which largely shields companies from liability for user-generated content but does not fully cover product design decisions.

Liability Exposure Expands Across Big Tech Platforms

The jury apportioned responsibility unevenly, assigning 70% liability to Meta and 30% to YouTube. The breakdown was reflected in proposed punitive damages, with $2.1 million attributed to Meta and $900,000 to YouTube.

Executives from both companies rejected the outcome. A spokesperson for Meta said mental health outcomes are complex and cannot be attributed to a single platform, while YouTube representatives argued the verdict mischaracterizes the service as social media rather than a video platform.

The case is part of a broader wave of litigation targeting major platforms, including prior settlements involving TikTok and Snap, which exited the case before trial. A separate jury ruling earlier in the week in New Mexico also found Meta in violation of state laws related to child safety, compounding legal pressure.

Bellwether Verdict Raises Stakes for Industry-Wide Litigation

Legal analysts view the case as a potential bellwether that could shape the trajectory of similar lawsuits. Thousands of claims are currently pending, many of which focus on whether platform design features constitute negligent or harmful practices.

Sarah Kreps, director of a technology policy institute at Cornell University, said the outcome could influence how courts approach future cases, particularly if appellate courts uphold the decision. Comparisons have been drawn to earlier litigation waves involving tobacco and opioids, where initial rulings eventually led to large-scale settlements.

However, experts caution that immediate operational changes across the industry remain unlikely. Appeals, additional test cases, and evolving legal standards will determine whether the ruling translates into structural changes in how platforms design engagement systems.

Data Governance and Youth Protection Enter New Phase

The case underscores a broader shift in regulatory focus toward data governance and user well-being, especially for younger demographics. Policymakers and courts are increasingly examining whether algorithmic systems and interface design choices create systemic risks that require oversight.

For technology companies, the implications extend beyond financial penalties. The ruling suggests that core engagement models—long central to advertising-driven revenue—may face sustained legal and regulatory challenges, particularly if further cases reinforce the precedent.

As litigation expands, the industry may be forced to balance growth strategies with stricter expectations around transparency, user protection, and product accountability—areas that are rapidly becoming central to the next phase of technology governance.

The post Social Media Liability Ruling Signals Escalating Regulatory Pressure on Platform Design appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.