Judge warns New Mexico prosecutors he won’t ‘overreach’ as bench trial against Meta begins
NM Department of Justice wants court to mandate company operate differently for underage users
by Danielle Prokop · Source New MexicoA New Mexico state district judge Monday morning expressed reservations at prosecutors’ efforts to overhaul how the social media giant Meta’s platforms work within the state, as the second phase of a landmark legal case gets underway.
The bench trial follows a Santa Fe jury’s March 24 verdict that Meta had violated New Mexico’s Unfair Practices Act, and misled the public on the risks of its sites —Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp — for underage users’ mental health and risk of sexual exploitation. The verdict, which Meta has said it will appeal, also ordered the company to pay $375 million in damages.
Now, in the bench trial, expected to run over the next three weeks in Santa Fe, the state Department of Justice will argue that Meta’s actions constitute a public nuisance. The state is asking for both monetary relief, and for the court to order the company to operate differently for its youth users.
Typically, public nuisance cases weigh the impact of activities on shared physical commodities, such as air quality or public spaces — so-called “public goods.” The bench trial will thus determine if the state has the power to mitigate the effects of “public health, welfare, or safety” in digital spaces.
New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez likened the effort to landmark lawsuits, such as the Yazzie/Martinez education equity lawsuit or some arguments brought in lawsuits against opioid manufacturers, during a news conference Monday following opening arguments.
“There’s always a first time for everything,” Torrez said. “I’m happy that the first time social media companies are held to account for public nuisance is to happen right here in a Santa Fe courthouse.”
Meta’s attorneys, however, argued Monday that in naming public health as the “public good” that Meta has harmed, the NMDOJ had [stretched] “the law beyond what it can tolerate,” noting that several state supreme courts have rejected similar arguments in lawsuits against opioid manufacturers.
Torrez was joined at the news conference by members of Parents RISE! a nonprofit that represents parents across the country who say their children died from harms from social media. While none of the parents live in New Mexico, Torrez said they were “all too familiar with the profound impact… that this technology has brought to bear in our communities not only in New Mexico, but around the country.”
Prior to hearing opening statements from attorneys, Biedscheid told the parties he held “some concerns” about the New Mexico Department of Justice’s request for court-mandated changes to the platform, and warned he would not “overreach” in his role.
“I’m probably not the easiest sell on an idea where I would become a one-person legislature, judge and executive branch enforcer of administrative code provisions,” Biedscheid said.
Among other actions, the state is requesting mandates that Meta’s platforms ban infinite scroll, autoplay and push notifications during school and sleep hours; along with capping access for New Mexico children on Meta platforms to 90 hours per month; and requiring the company to identify underage users and sexual abuse material. Additionally, NMDOJ requested that Biedscheid appoint an independent monitor to enforce any court order.
Attorneys representing the state said during opening statements Monday that the NMDOJ is asking Biedscheid to order Meta to pay $3.7 billion in restitution over the next 15 years.
David Ackerman, a private civil attorney representing New Mexico, said the size of the award “recognizes the scope of the public nuisance that Meta has caused. There are items in this abatement plan for public education, to assist schools, to assist law enforcement, to assist mental health providers who are treating children who are suffering from the effects of their social media use. [This] is about preventing harm from occurring to additional New Mexico children, It’s about fixing the harm that already occurred to New Mexico children and their families,” Ackerman said.
Attorneys for Meta on Monday morning restated their concerns that the state’s requests for how the company operates violate free speech for the platform and users, and argued that the state’s demands to the judge are “overbroad, vague, unworkable, dangerous,” and ultimately unlawful.
Attorneys for Meta also previewed their arguments that New Mexico failed to prove that social media, not other factors, has caused the harm to children’s mental health; and that the state Legislature — not a judge — should find the funds for addressing mental health care for New Mexico’s children.
“The evidence of this trial is going to show that what they are asking your honor to do is to not just be the judge, but to be the Legislature, to be the executive, to be the regulatory agency in Europe, all of it — and we don’t think it’s appropriate,” said Alex Parkinson, an attorney representing Meta.
Parkinson also echoed the company’s legal filings by noting that if Biedscheid grants the state’s demands, the company could remove use of its platforms within the state, calling the plan “untenable.”
“This is not a PR stunt, this is not a threat,” Parkinson said.