Juries in federal and state courts found this week that major technology companies are liable for public health harms affecting young users on their platforms, according to a March 27 announcement. The decisions represent a shift in the legal landscape for tech firms, which have long enjoyed broad protections from liability related to user content.
The significance of these verdicts lies in their potential impact on future litigation against social media companies. In Los Angeles, a jury awarded $3 million to a 20-year-old woman who argued that Meta and YouTube designed addictive features targeting teens and children. Separately, a New Mexico jury ordered Meta to pay $375 million after finding the company violated state consumer protection law by failing to protect minors from online predators and misleading the public about safety measures.
I. Glenn Cohen, deputy dean at Harvard Law School and faculty director at the Petrie-Flom Center for Health Law Policy, Biotechnology & Bioethics, said these cases are among thousands filed against social media firms. “The verdict is significant for the plaintiffs, but standing alone, [it’s] not a huge amount for Meta or YouTube to pay,” Cohen said. He noted that while this case may have had particularly compelling facts for the plaintiff, its outcome could influence settlement negotiations in other lawsuits.
Cohen also addressed expectations around appeals: “I think they are likely to appeal the case…they are almost certain to argue on appeal that Section 230 [of the 1996 Communications Decency Act] should have prohibited their liability.” He added that defendants may review trial procedures as part of their strategy moving forward.
Discussing broader implications, Cohen said it is too soon to draw conclusions about lasting changes but compared current litigation strategies against social media companies with those used in tobacco and opioid lawsuits: “As the liability risk piles up, a master settlement that will handle all or much of the litigation becomes more attractive.” He also noted uncertainty regarding whether Congress will pursue new regulations or allow court proceedings to continue shaping policy.
The outcomes of these bellwether trials could serve as reference points for ongoing cases nationwide as courts continue examining claims related to youth safety on digital platforms.
