At the centre of the case is a lawsuit brought by New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez, a Democrat, who accuses Meta Platforms of designing its social media products in ways that “addict young users” while failing to adequately protect them from sexual exploitation and other harms online.
The trial marks the second phase of the state’s legal action against the tech giant. In March, a jury found that Meta violated New Mexico’s consumer protection law by misleading users about the safety of Facebook and Instagram for minors, ordering the company to pay $375 million in damages.
Now, attention shifts to whether the company’s platforms constitute a “public nuisance” under state law — a finding that could give Judge Bryan Biedscheid authority to impose sweeping operational changes on how Meta’s apps function for users in the state.
“Public nuisance” argument at the centre of the dispute
Under New Mexico law, a public nuisance refers to conduct that “unreasonably interferes with the health and safety of a community.” Traditionally applied to issues like pollution or blocked public roads, the concept has increasingly been used in major litigation involving industries such as tobacco, opioids, vaping, and even climate-related harm.
Legal experts say this case could push that doctrine further into the digital age.
As one law professor, Adam Zimmerman of USC’s Gould School of Law, explained, states are now using public nuisance claims to pursue “a broader range of industries” than ever before.
If the court agrees with the state, it could authorize remedies aimed not just at compensation, but at forcing structural changes to Meta’s platforms.
Billions in damages and sweeping reforms on the table
New Mexico officials are expected to seek both additional financial penalties and major product redesigns aimed at protecting minors.
According to court filings, proposed changes include stricter age verification, algorithm adjustments to prioritize “quality content” for younger users, and the removal of features such as autoplay videos and infinite scrolling for minors.
Attorney General Torrez has framed the case as both financial and systemic.
“It will be an opportunity for us to explore more deeply the size and scale and effectively the monetary value of the public nuisance harm that was a product of this business's behavior for the last, you know, 10 or 15 years,” he told reporters ahead of the trial.
Reports also suggest the state could seek as much as $3.7 billion to fund a long-term mental health programme, including new facilities and expanded staffing — a demand Meta has sharply disputed.
Meta pushes back, warns of possible withdrawal
Meta has rejected the allegations, arguing that it has already implemented safeguards for younger users and that the state’s demands are unrealistic.
“The New Mexico Attorney General’s focus on a single platform is a misguided strategy that ignores the hundreds of other apps teens use daily,” a Meta spokesperson said ahead of the trial.
The company further warned that some of the proposed changes are “technologically impractical or completely impossible,” adding that they could ultimately force it to withdraw services from the state.
Meta has also argued in court filings that its platforms do not meet the legal definition of a public nuisance because they do not interfere with a public right, and it disputes claims that social media has been scientifically proven to cause mental health disorders in teenagers.
The company also cautioned investors this week that ongoing legal and regulatory pressure in both the United States and the European Union “could significantly impact our business and financial results.”
A case with national implications
The New Mexico trial is being closely watched far beyond state borders. More than 40 states, alongside over 1,300 school districts, have filed similar lawsuits against Meta and other social media companies, alleging that their products are intentionally engineered to be addictive to young users.
Many of those cases are seeking not just damages, but court-ordered reforms that could reshape platform design across the tech industry.
With Monday’s proceedings set before Judge Bryan Biedscheid in Santa Fe, the outcome could influence how far courts are willing to go in holding social media companies accountable for the design and impact of their platforms — and whether sweeping regulatory intervention becomes the new legal frontier for Big Tech.