New Mexico seeks child safety restrictions on Meta apps and algorithms in trial’s 2nd phase

SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) — New Mexico state prosecutors are seeking fundamental changes to Meta’s social media apps and algorithms to safeguard children in the second phase of a landmark trial on allegations that platforms such as Instagram have created a public safety hazard.

Opening statements began Monday in the three-week bench trial to decide whether the platforms of Meta, which also owns Facebook and WhatsApp, pose a public nuisance.

In the first phase, jurors ordered $375 million in civil penalties against Meta, determining that it knowingly harmed children’s mental health and concealed what it knew about child sexual exploitation on its platforms.

Prosecutors are now asking a judge impose fundamental changes aimed at reining in addictive features, improving age verification and preventing child sexual exploitation through default privacy settings and closer oversight.

Meta has vowed to appeal the jury verdict and warned that it could eliminate service in New Mexico entirely if forced to comply with impractical mandates and multibillion-dollar remedies.

“The fact that we’re having a trial on nuisance is itself a remarkable outcome,” said Eric Goldman, co-director of the High Tech Law Institute at Santa Clara University School of Law in California. “That theory is not well accepted as applied to the internet, and that theory doesn’t really fit the internet.”

As the trial reconvened Monday, state District Court Judge Bryan Biedscheid addressed concerns that the court might overreach its authority.

“I’m probably not the easiest sell on an idea where I would become a one-person legislature, judge and executive branch enforcer,” he said.

Trial could alter algorithms that define social media

New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez said the jury verdict punctured the aura of invincibility protecting tech companies from liability for material on their platforms under Section 230, a 30-year-old provision of the U.S. Communications Decency Act.

A Los Angeles jury separately found both Meta and YouTube liable for harms to children, validating long-standing concerns about dangers of social media.

New Mexico prosecutors are demanding that Meta help remedy a mental health crisis among children through a series of safeguards and changes, including a redesign of algorithms that make content recommendations so they no longer prioritize constant engagement.

New Mexico prosecution attorney David Ackerman outlined a $3.7 billion proposal for Meta to remedy harm to children that “recognizes the scope of the public nuisance that Meta has caused.”

“Across New Mexico, across the country, children are begging for help,” he said in opening statements. “It is thorough and it is necessary. There are items in this abatement plan for public education, to assist schools, to assist law enforcement, to assist mental health providers.”

Prosecutors are also targeting other app features linked to compulsive use such as “infinite scroll,” which continuously loads content; push notifications; and default settings that show tallies for “likes” and sharing. Their lawsuit also seeks improvements to age verification and other steps aimed at curbing child sexual exploitation.

And New Mexico wants child accounts on Meta platforms to have an associated parent or guardian, as well as a court-supervised child safety monitor to track safety improvements over time.

Meta asserts free speech protections

Executives have said the company continuously improves child safety and addresses compulsive use and that many demands from prosecutors are redundant.

In opening statements, Meta attorney Alex Parkinson disputed the idea that there is a public right to social media under nuisance laws.

“Are bars a public nuisance because drinking alcohol is undeniably associated with car fatalities?” Parkinson said. “If individual (social media) users have been hurt, they have a remedy — personal injury cases to cover the mental healthcare or any other care that they need. And that is what is happening in other lawsuits right now.”

The company also argues that its platforms are being singled out among hundreds of apps that teens use with less robust protections, while invoking concerns about restrictions on free speech.

“The state’s proposed mandates infringe on parental rights and stifle free expression,” Meta said last week in a statement.

Parkinson said prosecutors are making unworkable demands to change apps only for New Mexico users — an assertion disputed by the attorney general.

“To geo-fence New Mexico users into that version of the apps, new apps for New Mexico, that is not feasible, technologically,” Parkinson told the judge.

Influence could be far-reaching

The case is the first to reach trial among lawsuits filed by more than 40 state attorneys general on allegations that Meta contributes to a youth mental health crisis. Most are pursuing remedies in U.S. federal court.

Torrez said he envisions a broad public education campaign to help parents and children navigate social media safely, with new public service warnings on Meta apps.

“All of those kids need help, they need counseling, they need therapy,” Torrez said at a news conference Monday, accompanied by parent advocates for social media reforms.

Parkinson said the state’s $3.7 billion plan goes too far and would reshape the way all mental and behavioral healthcare is delivered to New Mexico teens.

“The state is asking you to develop from scratch a completely new regulatory regime that far exceeds anything in Europe, in Australia, anywhere,” Parkinson said in reference to a bevy of recent and planned restrictions on children’s online activities beyond the U.S.

Goldman said prosecutors may be venturing into uncertain legal waters just in seeking age verification mandates.

“In practice a court order saying that Facebook had to impose age authentication would have no Supreme Court textual support,” he said. “The Supreme Court might bless it. We don’t know.”

___

This story has been updated to correct the wording in the quote from Judge Bryan Biedscheid.