Meta is facing one of the most significant legal challenges in its history, as its historic defeat in a New Mexico court could cost it far more than the $375 million it has already been ordered to pay. New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez imposed the landmark ruling in a landmark case involving child safety on Meta ’s platforms .
Starting Monday, lawyers for Meta and New Mexico are back in court for a three-week public nuisance trial, where they will discuss changes that the Attorney General says should be made to Facebook, Instagram , and WhatsApp. These changes include adding age verification for New Mexico users, banning end-to-end encryption for users under 18, limiting usage of the platforms to 90 hours per month, features engagement-enhancing (like infinite scrolling and autoplay), and requiring Meta to detect 99% of new child sexual abuse material (CSAM).
See also: Meta's child safety judgment in the hands of two jurors
“From the beginning, our goal was to try to change the way the company does business,” Torrez The Verge during a recent visit to Washington. “I recognize that $375 million for a company this big and this profitable, is not enough on its own to change the way it does business. In fact, there are probably some people at this company who view this as a cost of doing business.”
Meta: The implications of the trial for the social media industry
Any changes ordered by the judge would only apply to Meta and its operations in New Mexico , but the company could potentially implement the changes in other states as well. Otherwise, its platforms in that state could also be shut down
However, a court ruling could send a message to other tech companies that courts may be willing to change their businesses if they are deemed inappropriate.
During the trial, New Mexico will argue that Meta has become a public nuisance, creating a public health risk in the state. The Attorney General's office expects to call about 15 witnesses, including experts who will testify about the feasibility of the proposed measures, and witnesses of fact who will testify about Meta's alleged harms.
See also: Meta lost 20 million users in the last quarter
After Meta presents its defense, Judge Bryan Biedscheid will evaluate which proposals are relevant and feasible — a process that could take some time, compared to the jury's quick decision in March.
The case arose from evidence that Meta knew its platforms were exposing children to sexual content and pedophiles, but failed to prevent the harms despite having the resources to do so. A jury in Santa Fe ruled against Meta, finding 37,500 willful violations related to unfair/deceptive practices and 37,000 reckless practices, resulting in a $375 million.
See also: EU targets Meta for inadequate child protection
A landslide victory for New Mexico could embolden Torrez and thousands of other plaintiffs currently pursuing cases against tech companies. A limited injunction, by contrast, could be a significant setback. The outcome won’t directly affect other cases, but it will almost certainly color negotiations over potential settlements. Many of Torrez’s demands are hot-button tech policy issues. Age verification would almost certainly require Meta or a third-party provider to collect more personal information about both adults and minors, which is wrong, privacy advocates say.
