Meta's bad week sparks Hill action
Add Axios as your preferred source to
see more of our stories on Google.
Illustration: Shoshana Gordon/Axios
Meta's court losses this week are adding urgency to lawmakers' push to pass legislation that could reshape how social media platforms are designed.
Why it matters: Plaintiffs in New Mexico and Los Angeles successfully tested a new legal theory that treats social media more like products that can cause harm — rather than protected speech — and chips away at tech's long-standing liability shield.
Catch up quick: A jury in New Mexico this week ordered Meta to pay $375 million after finding that the company violated state law by misleading users on safety and failing to protect children.
- The trial's second phase will start on May 4, and that could lead to design changes, such as effective age verification, ending encrypted messages on WhatsApp and a court-appointed child safety monitor to ensure compliance.
- In California, a jury this week found Meta and YouTube negligent in a landmark social media addiction trial. This case is tied to more than 2,000 other pending lawsuits, meaning the monetary penalties could add up quick.
The big picture: The White House emphasized kids' online safety in its pitch to Congress on how to tackle AI, but left the details up to lawmakers.
- The Hill is currently at odds over different versions of the Kids Online Safety Act.
- The House version advanced by the Energy and Commerce Committee omits a "duty of care" provision that would require platforms to take reasonable steps to mitigate harms stemming from design features like endless scroll or algorithmic recommendations. The Senate's bipartisan bill, meanwhile, tackles design choice.
- "Now that Big Tech has been found liable for the harms they have pushed on our kids, it's time for Congress to enshrine protections for American families into law by passing the Kids Online Safety Act," said co-sponsor Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.).
Lawmakers also took the opportunity to tee up other legislative efforts in light of the court cases.
- Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) called on Congress to sunset Section 230, Big Tech's liability shield which protects platforms from being held responsible for what users post and remains controversial 30 years after passage.
- "These back-to-back decisions in New Mexico and California show that Big Tech has become Big Tobacco," he said.
- Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), who has long called for overhauling Section 230, said that the California decision is "a solid first step towards accountability for some of the addictive and harmful measures Big Tech has aimed at users, especially minors, but we're gonna need a lot more action."
The other side: Meta plans to appeal the decisions and notes the Los Angeles jury took more than a week to come to its decision and was not unanimous in its verdict.
- The company points to its parental controls as evidence it has been proactive in protecting kids online.
What we're watching: Meta could decide to appeal or fight until the end as several more cases are up next.
- Rulings this week are being compared to the moment that Big Tobacco was held accountable for consumer harm — but with many lengthy legal battles ahead, this is poised to be a slower chipping away of tech's liability shield.
