����������ϼ�

The statements I’m about to share are my own, and not a formal stance of the CASA program.

As a volunteer with court appointed special advocates (CASA), I spend time with children who have experienced abuse, neglect and instability. I’ve sat in living rooms, courtrooms and classrooms with kids who are trying to make sense of harm that never should have happened in the first place. So, when I read the claim that a $375 million verdict against Meta Platforms somehow signals “litigation tourism,” I see something very different.

I see accountability.

The case against Meta centered on a serious allegation: that its platforms knowingly exposed children to harm. For those of us who advocate for kids, that is not an abstract policy debate — it’s a daily reality. Children today live much of their lives online, and when powerful companies fail to put their safety first, the consequences are real, lasting and sometimes devastating.

Calling this verdict excessive ignores both the scale of the harm and the scale of the company. Meta is one of the most valuable corporations in the world, worth well over a trillion dollars. A $375 million penalty amounts to roughly 0.023% of its total net worth — a fraction so small it barely registers on its balance sheet.

To put that in perspective: For an average American family with a net worth of about $200,000, 0.023% equals roughly $46. That’s what this verdict represents to Meta — not a crippling blow, but a signal. A message that protecting children is not optional.

The suggestion that holding corporations accountable will drive away investment sets up a false choice. New Mexico does not have to choose between economic development and the safety of its children. In fact, a fair and functioning civil justice system is part of what makes a state strong. It tells families that their voices matter and tells corporations that responsibility comes with opportunity.

As someone who volunteers with CASA, I can tell you that the cost of inaction is far higher than the cost of protecting our kids. When children are harmed — whether in their homes, their communities, or online — we all pay the price in strained schools, overwhelmed social services and broken futures. Those costs don’t show up in opinion columns, but they are borne by every community.

This verdict does not make New Mexico a “Judicial Hellhole.” It makes New Mexico a place where juries take their role seriously, where evidence is weighed and where even the most powerful entities can be held accountable when children are put at risk. The heroes in this story are the jurors who had the courage to do the right thing.

That’s not something to fear. That’s something to be proud of.

Because at the end of the day, the question isn’t whether a company might think twice about investing here. The question is whether we are willing to stand up for children when it matters most.

As a CASA volunteer, I know my answer.

Arishanda Campbell is a court appointed special advocate volunteer and child advocate.