In our earlier post on the social media addiction litigation, we wrote that a second phase of the New Mexico case was scheduled for May 2026; a public nuisance proceeding in which the state would seek court-ordered changes to Meta's platforms. That trial began today in Santa Fe before Judge Bryan Biedscheid, and it has the potential to reshape how Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp operate, not just in New Mexico but across the country.
This update covers what changed, why it matters, and what families considering claims should know.
What's at Stake in This Phase
The March 2026 jury verdict in the same case ordered Meta to pay $375 million for misrepresenting the safety of Facebook and Instagram for young users. That phase was about money. This phase is about changing how the products work.
New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez is asking Judge Biedscheid to find that Meta's platforms constitute a "public nuisance" under state law - the same legal theory historically used against tobacco, opioids, lead paint, and vaping. A finding for the state would empower the court to order Meta to make specific operational changes, including:
- Age verification for users
- Redesigned algorithms that promote quality content rather than maximizing engagement for minors
- An end to autoplay and infinite scrolling for users under 18
- Stronger systems to identify and remove adults who engage in or facilitate child exploitation
The state is also seeking approximately $3.7 billion in damages to fund a 15-year mental health plan for New Mexico teens; money that would build healthcare facilities and hire providers to address harms the state attributes to platform design.
Meta's Response: An Unusual Threat to Withdraw
Meta has warned in court filings that if the judge orders broad changes, it may withdraw Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp from New Mexico entirely. The company argues that the requested remedies are "technologically or practically infeasible" and would require building separate, New-Mexico-only versions of each app.
Attorney General Torrez has called the withdrawal warning a "PR stunt," noting that Meta has changed its platforms many times before when market access was at stake. Whether the threat is real or strategic, the fact that Meta is making it publicly is itself a signal: the company views the injunctive remedies as more dangerous to its business than the $375 million damages award that preceded them.
In a related disclosure last week, Meta warned investors that legal and regulatory pressure in the U.S. and Europe "could significantly impact our business and financial results."
Why This Matters Beyond New Mexico
A public nuisance ruling against Meta would not directly bind courts in other states, but it would do something nearly as powerful: provide a working model that other states, school districts, and municipalities can adopt. More than 40 other states and over 1,300 school districts have already filed similar lawsuits seeking court-ordered reforms, a substantial increase from the figures we cited in our earlier post. A win for New Mexico would give every one of those plaintiffs a roadmap.
For families, the practical implication is straightforward. The legal infrastructure for these cases is not slowing down — it is expanding. Verdicts are being returned. Discovery is being shared across proceedings. New plaintiff theories are being tested and validated. Each milestone like this one tends to compress the timeline for individual claims and strengthen the evidentiary record available to plaintiffs' counsel.
What Comes Next
Judge Biedscheid will hear evidence in the coming weeks and rule on whether Meta's conduct meets the public nuisance standard. There is no jury in this phase; the decision rests with the judge alone. Whatever he decides, appeals are virtually certain. But the trial itself will produce a public record of internal Meta documents, expert testimony, and findings of fact that will be available to plaintiffs' attorneys nationwide.
The federal MDL in the Northern District of California continues to advance on a parallel track, with the first school district bellwether trial still scheduled for summer 2026.
Contact Triten Law
If your family has been affected by harms tied to social media platform use — and especially if your child began using these platforms as a minor, the legal landscape continues to develop in ways that may benefit your claim. Triten Law offers free, confidential consultations to evaluate whether your situation fits within the existing litigation. Contact us today.
← Back to News & Insights