In the trial’s second phase, the state will push for changes to Meta’s business model.
New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez secured a landmark $375 million judgment against Meta in a major child safety case earlier this year. However, the subsequent phase poses a significant challenge for Meta and the broader social media sector.
Starting Monday, attorneys for Meta and New Mexico will reconvene in a Santa Fe courthouse for a three-week public nuisance trial. The focal point will be the changes the AG wants Meta to implement on Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. These changes involve implementing age verification for New Mexico users, banning end-to-end encryption for users under 18, limiting their usage to 90 hours monthly, curbing engagement-boosting features like infinite scroll and autoplay, and ensuring Meta detects 99 percent of new child sexual abuse material (CSAM).
“Our goal has always been to change the company’s business operations,” Torrez told The Verge during a recent visit to Washington, DC, advocating for new child safety legislation. He noted that even an amount as substantial as $375 million isn’t enough for a company as large and profitable as Meta to alter its business practices, suggesting some within Meta might view it as a business expense.
Though any changes mandated by the judge would only impact Meta’s operations in New Mexico, the company could choose to apply these changes in other states for simplicity, or it might opt to cease operations in New Mexico altogether, as it has previously threatened. A court order here could alert other tech companies that courts might impose alterations on their business models if found liable.
New Mexico will argue during the trial that Meta constitutes a public nuisance by posing a public health risk within the state. The AG’s office plans to call roughly 15 witnesses, including experts on the feasibility of their proposed measures and fact witnesses on Meta’s alleged harms. After Meta’s defense, Judge Bryan Biedscheid will assess which proposals are relevant and feasible, potentially taking more time than the quick jury verdict in March.
A comprehensive victory for New Mexico could invigorate Torrez and the many other plaintiffs suing tech companies. A limited order, however, could significantly damage their efforts. While the outcome won’t directly affect other cases, it will likely influence settlement negotiations.
Some of Torrez’s proposals are contentious tech policy issues. Age verification could necessitate additional personal data collection on both adults and minors, raising privacy concerns. Don McGowan, a former board member of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, remarked that banning encrypted communications on platforms like Facebook could drive users to other platforms not affected by the lawsuit.
The mandate may have minimal impact on some business areas — Meta recently announced plans to discontinue end-to-end encrypted messaging on Instagram that was infrequently used.
Peter Chapman, associate director of the Knight-Georgetown Institute, highlighted potential “significant tradeoffs” with banning encryption, suggesting that other measures might be more effective. Evidence from the state indicated Meta’s profile recommendations connected adults and minors, a feature posing clear harm, which Torrez also wants halted. “There’s a chance to intervene there to prevent these harmful interactions without addressing encryption,” Chapman said.
No single feature change is likely to resolve all child and teen safety issues, Chapman noted. Torrez plans to seek multiple layers of changes. However, the effectiveness of any remedy depends on its implementation and monitoring. For example, what method will Meta use to report a 99 percent detection rate of new CSAM? How will it account for undetected instances? This also applies to age verification’s accuracy and reliability.
Meta highlights this issue in disputing Torrez’s proposals. “Regardless of the threshold, Meta could never prove the system met that standard without detecting 100% of CSAM for the calculation,” Meta stated in a legal filing. Torrez’s chief deputy, James Grayson, said an independent monitor, who has yet to be named, would oversee tracking.
Meta and groups opposing the AG’s approach argue the desired outcomes are counterproductive. “Demands in New Mexico are ill-informed and pose additional exploitation risks,” said Maureen Flatley, president of Stop Child Predators, a group funded by Meta-backed NetChoice. “Holding platforms responsible for these issues would be like blaming banks for robberies.”
Meta spokesperson Chris Sgro called the New Mexico AG’s focus “misguided,” ignoring the many apps teens use. “The mandates infringe on parental rights and stifle free expression in New Mexico,” he said. “Still, we remain committed to safe, age-appropriate experiences and have launched many of the state’s desired protections, including 13 safety measures this past year.”
Torrez is also targeting the broader tech sector. He recently visited Washington, DC, advocating for new online child protections and a reform of Section 230, the law shielding tech platforms from liability for user posts. Although successful in district court, he believes the current law creates ambiguity. If companies couldn’t hide behind Section