The DeVory Darkins Show - META dealt MAJOR LEGAL BLOW after shock verdict

Episode Date: March 26, 2026

META dealt MAJOR LEGAL BLOW after guilty verdict. This comes after META was hit with a $3 million verdict and a $375 Million verdict on the same day. Also, Democrats spent time obsessing over January 6th instead of funding TSA employees.EPISODE SPONSOR: Call Lear at 800-920-8388 or go to http://LearDevory.com to learn more.FOLLOW ME:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.x.com/devorydarkins⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/devorydarkins⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.rumble.com/c/devorydarkins⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://devory.wtf.tv⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠BUY ME A COFFEE:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://buymeacoffee.com/devorydarkins⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠SHOP OUR MERCH STORE:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://store.devorydarkins.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠BUSINESS INQUIRIES:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠[e-mail]⁠⁠⁠⁠

In today's video, we have major updates starting with meta. They have lost two cases, one in the amount of $3 million and another one in an amount of $375 million. Also, the Save America Act, Republicans still do not have any answers. And instead of funding TSA employees today, Democrats were hanging a January 6 plaque. Before we get to all of that, let's hear what happened with the case with Meta. Take a listen. The world's biggest tech giants found liable as a California jury says, meta and Google were negligent, maliciously so. their platforms were designed to be addictive and harmful to teens.

Welcome to a new hour of America reports. I'm John Roberts in Washington. Just the news never stops, Sandra. It does not. Good to be with you, John. I'm Sandra Smith in New York. It is a $3 million verdict, but the bigger story may be what comes next. This ruling could open the floodgates for more lawsuits from parents, states, and beyond.

And the reach is massive. Studies show at least half of American teens use YouTube or Instagram each and every day. Let's bring in Donna Routuna, the criminal defense attorney and Fox News Channel contributor. Donna, great to see you. Thanks very much for joining us. So we've got one award, and that's compensatory damages of $3 million. A potentially big reward lies ahead with punitive damages because these companies were found to be negligent and maliciously so. Yeah, now I'll be, okay, now I'll be a little honest with you guys.

I'm actually a little stunned that they were able to get a verdict here, and there is an amount that they're going to pay. I don't think this amount is going to make a difference for a company like Meadow or a company like Google. But it is the first dominole to fall that could actually show that these social media companies can be held liable. And I would argue if I had it by way, guys, we would go back to where I'd say pre-2009, pre-2009. Anything after 2009, I don't want any of it. Okay. But if we could still have technology, but not in the way where it's clearly dominating our lives, I think we would be better off as the society. Now let's go to the plaintiff's lawyer. Here's what he had to say. Was negligent in the way they designed and operated their platform. They found that meta failed to give what a reasonable company should give as warnings. And they found that meta's failure to operate their platform in a reasonably prudent fashion.

and to warn in a reasonably prudent fashion was a direct cause, substantial contributing factor to harming Kaley to the tune of $3 million, which is not a rounding error. Then they had a set of questions on YouTube. YouTube's defenses that they were just TV were shunned by the jury, and the jury said that YouTube, Google, failed to operate YouTube in a reasonable fashion. and it's their failure to operate it in a reasonable fashion that held YouTube accountable as well. The jury also said that YouTube failed to give reasonable warnings. So after the jury did that and assessed the damages of $3 million,

the jury then at that point answered the question of what percentage of responsibility is there on the two companies based upon the, the conduct as Kaley experienced it. And they put 70% on meta. They put 30% on YouTube. Then they gave findings that both of them acted in ways that constitute conduct that should be punished. Now, just imagine the upcoming lawsuits that are going to take place because of this particular verdict. It's the same situation that happened with doctors being held liable for cutting off people's body parts, particularly young children.

They are being held liable. And so now they're going to have to think twice about how users are given a particular warning and what they're doing to prevent certain underage, whether that limit is 16 years old, 18 years old, whatever it might be, to crack down on that as well. And then, of course, their algorithm. I mean, listen, I keep saying it. There's so much noise on the Internet. You don't even have to be 16 years old to be negatively impacted.

by it. You could be 70, you could be 30, you could be 14. Everybody's actually dealing with this. Now, the problem, obviously, the younger people, some of them go to the worst case scenario, which is suicide. And that's just a terrible thing. Let's go to the reaction that was on Newsmax. Take a listen. Mark, your reaction, what happens next? Does this change social media as we know it? Well, if it stands up on appeal, everybody's all celebrating, but I assure you, they will have the best civil lawyers in the country who do nothing but appeals to make sure that this is overturned because this decision, the word that comes to mind, is colossal. Not just that they're losing 3 million, which is probably what they spend on mince in their bathrooms a year, but we're talking

about what that means in terms of opening the floodgates to everyone. Listen, any parent of a teenager as I am knows how addictive social media can be. I think that these jurors knew that before they walked in, and they heard testimony that these companies breached their legal duty to the users and created an unsafe design for the ultimate people who used it. And that, unfortunately, is going to cost them. Now, here's a good question. What's more dangerous for someone who's 16 years old, drinking hard liquor or doom scrolling on social media? That's a good question, right? Now, on one hand, obviously, if they are under the influence, they could potentially have alcohol intoxication.

It doesn't normally happen, but could happen. That's a good question. Why don't you guys answer that in the comments section? Anyways, my point to why I'm asking you guys this question, why don't they just pass a law that says, if you're 17 years or younger, you're banned from cell phones and you're banned from social media. You can Google, you can go read articles. but what you can't do is walk around with a cell phone and you and have access to social media apps. Now maybe banning the cell phones might be a little too extreme, but I think the social media companies, I think they've done a piss poor job of preventing people who are teenagers from accessing their platforms.

I don't think they've really done anything to prevent that. I don't think it's hard. So maybe this will wake them up. Let's go here. The jury also deciding that both companies acted in malice, oppression, or fraud that brings the total damages to an amount of $6 million. That's for both punitive and compensatory damages, with META to pay a total of $4.2 million and YouTube to pay $1.8 million.

Meta responding, quote, we respectfully disagree with the verdict and will appeal. Teen mental health is profoundly complex and cannot be linked to a single app with a Google spokesperson saying we disagree with the verdicts and plan to appeal. This case misunderstands YouTube, which is a responsibly built stream. platform, not a social media site. One of the promises from the president was about protecting the value of the dollar. Let's just say that hasn't happened whatsoever, which is why gold and silver has been on a bull run for quite some time. It's been outperforming the S&P 500, as you guys know.

I think it's safe to say that we told you so because we've been talking about precious metals investing for quite some time. If you've been watching for at least a year and I've been repeating myself constantly. And the reason why I have is because not only am I invested in precious metals assets, you should too. But before you can even make a decision like that, you got to speak to people you can trust, including people who are known to be the experts, and that is Lair Capital. That's what Lair Capital is all about helping you understand exactly how you can leverage precious metals today, given where we're at in the market. So call them today. 1-800-920-8388. 1-800-920838 or go to Lear Devoree.com to learn more. The link is in the description and also the

chat. Again, if you mentioned my name. you could qualify for up to $20,000 in bonus gold or silver with a qualified purchase. So give them a call today. They see how much bonus medals you qualify for. Yeah, but it can be linked to the overall industry. And if your app is one of the major players in that industry, you definitely share some level of responsibility. I don't know why meta would even issue a statement like that.

I think the semantics around what YouTube is saying, maybe you can argue that point. It's technically not a social media. maybe, maybe, but meta for sure, they are definitely far gone. This is not the Facebook that me and you grew up with. Let's just say that. All right, let's go to this other story that happened literally at the same time. So meta obviously is being forced to pay $3 million.

That's nothing compared to what they're going to be forced to pay in this New Mexico trial. Take a listen. We're back with this Fox Business Alert. Meta, the parent of Facebook and Instagram, just ordered to pay $370,000,000, $75 million after the company was found liable for endangering children. This is related to a lawsuit brought by the state of New Mexico. We are still waiting on a verdict in the landmark addiction trial against Meta and Google in Los Angeles, California. In a statement of Fox business, Meta says, quote, we respectfully disagree with the verdict and will appeal.

We work hard to keep people safe on our platforms. We will continue to defend ourselves vigorously, and we remain confident in our record of protecting teens online. Okay, we will follow. Meantime, well, number one, we know that inherently these social media platforms, it's very difficult to actually keep people safe. And what I mean by that is the algorithm inherently wants people to stay on the platform. That's how it becomes successful.

What's the number one way to keep people on the platform is to trigger them? trigger them with content that makes them upset that gets them fighting in the comments. And number two, I don't really believe meta or any social media platform really has as much control over their algorithm as we'd like to think. For example, if you're a user of X, you could see it clear as day that this platform or that platform has continued to become slop as time has gone on. No matter what Elon Musk has announced about what they're going to do to improve the platform, it's actually only gotten worse.

And if you've been on there, you know exactly what I'm talking about. and meta and Instagram, they're no better either. So I don't think they're really in the business of keeping people safe. I think they're in the business of making money. And sometimes keeping people safe would actually lose them money. So that's why I say that. All right. Let's go to our next story.

And this is about the Democrats. So, you know, again, I'm totally exhausted as far as this whole shutdown is concerned. But while this shutdown is happening, while this continuous gaslighting is happening for the TSA employees out there, Democrats did make time today to recognize the Capitol police who participated in January 6th and they wanted to make sure that the plaque was installed and they had this whole ceremony. So let's take a look at it and talk about it. Watch this. Quote, their heroism will not be forgotten.

Their heroism will not be forgotten. Those are the words inscribed a few yards from where we stand on a plaque that at long last, long last, now stands on display here at the Capitol. We gather today not merely to remember the past, but to also reaffirm the truth, that on January 6th, democracy prevailed. Thanks to the bravery of our first responders. All right. So there's really only three sides to this whole situation regarding January 6th.

There's a side where there's a particular amount of Americans who could care less about this particular story. They never followed it. They have plenty of things to worry about in their life besides what happened on January 6th. Then there's a side that won't let it go. All they do is obsess over it. They leave. They breathe January 6th. They assess over it. These are the people who hate the president, blame them for everything. And then the third side is the people who just want people to know the actual full picture, the full story of actually what happened, whether that was FBI agents that were actually staged there, whether it was the unwillingness of Nancy Pelosi down to the D.C. mayor who refused to deploy the National Guard, or it's the BB

manipulating what the president actually said that day. Regardless of the matter, there's not going to be any common ground on this particular issue. That's why I would say Democrats should focus on paying TSA employees instead of getting wrapped up in this January 6th plaque. Let's go to Hakeem Jepers. Here's what he said. We are here to recognize the heroism of the hundreds of dedicated Capitol Police, Metropolitan Police Department, and other law enforcement officers who stood in this building and across these capital grounds to defend the Congress, defend the country, and defend the Constitution on January 6th, five years ago in 2021,

from thousands of bloodthirsty rioters. This is what really makes me believe we live in two different countries. I'm telling you, they're just search. issues or stories or debates that there's not going to be any common ground on. Okay. It's like you're going to be talking past each other, unfortunately. This is why I essentially hope that we as a country get back to a time where we can't agree to disagree.

We can't even do that today. I mean, if you disagree, I mean, some people would actually just step one, violence, right? Step two, censor you. Step three, lock you up. Right? I mean, that's how the left has been behaving with people they disagree with. I just wish we can actually get back to that. One more clip here, and then we'll move on.

This is Nancy Pelosi saying. And I just want to just dwell a little moment on these heroes. They fought to defend the capital of the United States. They thought in support of the Constitution of the United States. They fought that for the Congress of the United States, at a time when an instance, insurrection was incited by the president of the United States who could figure that that would ever happen. But we thank you for that. The bottom line is their reaction to January 6th proved how tyrannical and how weaponized the DOJ can become. I'm talking about individuals

who were not physically present on January 6th who were sent to prison. Make sense of that in your mind if you can't, please. I'm even talking about individuals who were not physically present on January 6th who were sent to prison. Make sense of that in your mind if you can't, please. I'm even talking about people who were there, never put their hands on a police officer, was not actually rioting whatsoever, was just peacefully walking around, taking pictures and videos.

They went to prison too. It's a totally overreach of the federal government, and they'll never take responsibility of it, or take responsibility for it, because in the eyes of Democrats, tearing down our democracy and breaking the laws is justified if it means we get to destroy Donald Trump. All right, let's move on.

And this story, again, it just makes you really discuss it at the incompetence that we continue to experience, particularly from the Senate GOP, because they're essentially, again, accepting defeat over the Save America Act. I want you to listen to the story. Again, it's as if there is no pathway forward on this particular piece of legislation. Take a listen. Let's get an update on the prospects for passing President Trump's top list. legislative agenda item. The Save America Act, Chief Congressional correspondent Chad

program is live on Capitol Hill tonight with that. Good evening, Chad. Brett, good evening. Shifting to a potential DHS funding bill sidetracks the Save America Act. The Senate has nothing to show for its lengthy debate. I'm telling you, the Save Act is not going to pass. Currently, they have to change the rules of the Senate for that to happen. Republicans want to resume debate on the Save America Act after a Senate recess. We've had this battle now for two weeks. This is going to continue after we get back after the Easter break. Advocates of the bill vow they will not retreat.

We're busting our butt to do what the public wants us to do. You say you're busting your behind here to try to get the Safe America Act, then why haven't we seen like a 25-hour speech, Cory Booker style by somebody, to keep the Senate in session around the clock and really started doing this. We went out at 4 o'clock on Sunday afternoon. I think I think we ought to do everything we can. I mean, why don't you could do it? Well, I've been down there. Have you given a 20 hour? I've been down there talking about it. That's actually a really good question. I mean, that's fair. I mean, say what you want about Democrats. They are crazy, but you can't argue they're

willing to go to the end of the earth. I'm not too sure Republicans. I have not gotten the the inclination that this current Republican Party, the way it's constructed today and who is leading it, I don't believe they're willing to go to the ends of the earth to get their legislation passed. I think they're just waiting the president out. I might sound like a doomer when I say that, but how else can you interpret their lack of urgency, their lack of energy, really? Yeah, you have some voices here or there, but they're not in charge of the party. They're not Speaker Johnson.

they're not leader of Thune. And quite frankly, I don't think those two really have the leverage. We may think they do. And I think it's showing in the results. Let's continue. Some Republicans say their side promised something they can't deliver. It's disingenuous to go out to the people and say, I'm fighting for you when you haven't even entered the ring. Republicans now hope to include part of the Save America Act, voter ID in a special bill called budget reconciliation.

But the Senate's umpire could rule that out of order. The parliamentarian has a role to play in that process, and in the past, we have respected it. Now, budget reconciliation is restricted to money and taxes, not policy. That's why voter ID might not make the cut. Yeah, I don't think you guys are surprised by that reporting. No shocker there. Again, I'm not convinced it's actually going to pass. I think, again, if we can't even fund TSA employees, if we already had a 43-day government shutdown,

and it really was only the one big, beautiful bill they can hang their hat on because in every administration, you at least got to pass one big bill, they don't really have anything to show for themselves. Now, let's go to Chris Cuomo. I think his statement is really going to make you shake your head because there's still a misconception about what is required if the Save America Act is passed from everyday Americans. Take a listen. Here's my pitch on the SAVE Act, okay? Of course it's 80-20 that with the American people that you should use an ID to vote because they're thinking it's an ID just like their driver's license or any other ID.

They're not understanding that this is going to be harder to get. So here's my idea on the SAVE Act for you guys. Well, I mean, it is. It's harder to get what they want. If you need a passport or you need your birth certificate, that's harder than a driver's license in a lot of states. Randy, that's all I'm saying. So let's do this. keep it the way you want. Well, what I'm saying is true, but hold on. What if you flip the mechanism?

Don't put it on the people. Put it on the government. Have them do the outreach, contact the voters, and champion the process so that it's not so onerous on people who don't have the money or the inclination or the documents, don't have a passport, have the complication of being a married woman with a different name or a college kid, you know, or they don't have a driver's license, put it on the government. Have them do it. That's my first idea. You can have the ID, but the government should facilitate it, Randy. Would you be okay with that?

All right. So before we go to what Representative Randy Fine had to say, let me just clarify something here. So I just got my Texas driver's license. You know what I had to bring with me to get a Texas driver's license? Not to vote in an election. A Texas driver's license. I had to bring my passport.

And if I didn't have a passport, I had to bring my birth certificate. That's mandatory. One or the other. There is no other options. So why do I bring that up? Because these people are acting as if these requirements don't already exist for something, in my opinion, is less valuable than voting in our elections. It's interesting.

It really is. And my wife, she had to provide the same document. But again, he doesn't get it. Let's go to Representative Reni Fine. Here's what he has to say. Chris, but that's not what the proposal is. A driver's license would be adequate in order to vote. The things you're talking about with a passport is a one-time thing to prove you're a citizen

when you register to vote, much like you have to do when you do a lot of things. But the driver's license that Americans have is all you need. And by the way, we do this today in Florida, the third largest state in the country and our elections work just fine. In fact, it appears that Democrats may win some elections in Florida tonight, despite the fact that we require photo IDs. So the idea that people object to photo IDs, it's ridiculous. We ought to just do it. 80% of Americans want it.

70% of Democrats want it. There's no reason not to do it. There is no reason not to do it. But if you are a Democrat, there's plenty of reasons not to do it. Because on one hand, we know who they really want to vote in our elections, which is why they're so hell-bent against this. Two, where Republicans, in my opinion, lose credibility on this particular issue is one, they still have yet to define Election Day as a federal holiday. And two, they have not done anything to address the census. So you can go out there and you can try to attempt to change these laws, which I don't think is going to happen as we stand here today.

But what we can do is change the census. That's a huge deal. But again, I don't know if they're really that serious. Let's go to Newsmax. This is Dinesh D'Souza, and he's really answering a simple question here. So whether you think this is going to make it harder for people to vote, or if you think this is Jim Crow 2.0, here's his take on it. Watch.

Question, is there any actual comparison between real Jim Crow laws what I just went through and asking people to show ID before you vote? None at all. The key to Jim Crow was to, well, Part of it we mentioned was simply the physical separation of the races. That obviously is not applicable here. No one is saying, let's just have blacks produce ID and whites don't have to produce ID. So there's no double standard of that kind at all.

The only part that the Democrats are trying to capitalize on is the idea of having artificial rules that have nothing to do with voting that were imposed on blacks. Like, for example, prove you own a house, for example, or you have to pay a fee in order to vote. Now, none of that is at issue here. I mean, think about it. ID is a basic requirement of our society. If we were to dispense with ID, airports would shut down, medical facilities would shut down, banks would shut down, the Democratic National Convention would shut down.

So the idea that you have to produce an ID to show that you are who you are and that you're eligible to vote is absolutely basic. The only people who would oppose that, I think, are people who are trying to keep in place mechanisms, that make it easier to cheat mechanisms that open the door to potential fraud. At MedCan, we know that life's greatest moments are built on a foundation of good health, from the big milestones to the quiet winds. That's why our annual health assessment offers a physician-led, full-body checkup

that provides a clear picture of your health today and may uncover early signs of conditions like heart disease and cancer. The healthier you means more moments to cherish. Take control of your well-being and book an assessment today. Medcan. Live well for life. Visit medcan.com slash moments to get started. Democrats' attitude, fraud is not an issue. Voter fraud is not an issue.

You know, those are not issues. Okay. Donald Trump is the issue. Okay. That's why I said, their whole mindset, if you can't notice throughout this video, is very simple.

We will burn democracy down. We will break any law we can if it means we are going to be able to stop Donald Trump and his supporters. That's really what it is. and people have amnesia. They don't realize how tyrannical the government was when Joe Biden was in office against Trump supporters. And we can go all the way back to 2016 as a reminder as well.

But at any rate, why don't you guys give me your thoughts in the comments section below? One, about the State of America Act. Two, what do you make up this whole January 6th plaque ceremony? And three, what do you think of the jury in really two separate cases? One, 375 million verdict against META. and a $3 million verdict against them as well. Give me your thoughts, everything you got in the comments section below. All right, let's go to our next video,

and now we're talking about more unhinged behavior from Democrats. This comes from a Philadelphia district attorney who just threatened to arrest ICE agents who are at the Philly Airport. He held a whole press conference and absolutely lost his mind. If you guys missed on on that update and more, click on the video because it's coming up right now.