A trial without a jury began this Monday in New Mexico against Meta, parent of Instagramto determine whether their practices constitute a “public nuisance” by not adequately protecting minors from predators on their platforms.
The case, which is taking place before Judge Bryan Biedscheid, arises from a lawsuit filed by the prosecutor frequent Raúl Torrez, who accuses the company of designing products like Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp to generate addiction among young people, in addition to not adequately protecting them against risks such as sexual exploitation.
The right phase of the trial focuses on determining whether the company’s practices constitute a “public nuisance” under state law, which would open the door to imposing structural changes on its platforms. If confirmed, the ruling could force Meta to redesign key functions of its services, at least within the state.
Meta’s refusal to apply the rules that give protection to our young folks tells you every little thing you might perhaps additionally neutral get cling of got to learn about this firm,” Licensed educated Frequent Raul Torrez wrote on X: https://t.co/vo0DntjOrv
— The National Desk (@TND) Would possibly perhaps possibly perhaps neutral 4, 2026
A case with million-dollar and regulatory implications
This judicial process marks the second stage of a legal dispute that has already left consequences for the company. In March, a jury found that Meta violated consumer protection laws by misrepresenting the safety of its platforms to young users, ordering it to pay $375 million in damages.
Now, prosecutors are seeking much broader sanctions. State could seek additional billions, court documents sayestimated at up to $3.7 billion, intended to fund adolescent mental health programs over the next 15 years.
In addition to financial compensation, authorities propose measures such as strict age verification, removal of features such as infinite scrolling and autoplay for minorsas well as adjustments to algorithms to prioritize content considered safe.
Prosecutor Torrez has insisted that the case goes beyond money. As he said in recent days, the objective is to force big technology companies to take responsibility for the impact of their products on the mental health and safety of young people.
Meta warns of possible consequences and denies accusations
Meta’s defense maintains that many of the state’s demands are “technologically unfeasible” and could affect fundamental rights such as freedom of expression. In documents filed with the court, the company also stated that it has already implemented multiple tools to protect minors.
A company spokesperson criticized the state’s focus on a single company, ignoring the broader digital ecosystem in which teenagers interact. Likewise, he warned that, if certain conditions were imposed, Meta could consider withdrawing its services from the state.
The trial has also brought to the table testimonies from families who attribute risk situations for minors to social networks.including cases of harassment, contact with predators and exposure to dangerous content. These stories have been used by the prosecution to reinforce their argument that there is collective damage that justifies judicial intervention.
The outcome of the case is closely followed by authorities throughout the country. More than 40 states and hundreds of school districts have filed similar lawsuits against technology companies, seeking structural changes in the industry.
A New Mexico ruling could set a national precedent, redefining the legal boundaries of digital platforms and its responsibility in the protection of minors in the United States.
Keep reading:
- Bill: social networks without access for minors under 16 years of age in California
- Historic ruling in California: Meta and Google found guilty of social media addiction
- New Mexico jury convicts Meta for failing to protect minors from sexual predators
