Today marks a pivotal moment for Meta as the company enters trial proceedings in the state of New Mexico, standing accused of failing to adequately safeguard minors from sexual exploitation across its major social media platforms, including Facebook and Instagram. The state government contends that Meta’s actions—and, importantly, its inactions—constitute violations of New Mexico’s Unfair Practices Act. According to the claim, design decisions embedded within the company’s apps, as well as the operation of their underlying recommendation algorithms, allegedly fostered environments that were both perilous and conducive to predatory behavior online. More than two years after this lawsuit was initially filed, the case has now reached a critical phase, with opening arguments formally commencing in a Santa Fe courtroom, underscoring the significance of the state’s challenge to one of the most powerful technology companies in the world.
This week represents a moment of extraordinary legal scrutiny for Meta, as another major case unfolds simultaneously on the West Coast. In California, a landmark social media trial is beginning that will serve as the nation’s first direct legal test of the concept of ‘social media addiction.’ This proceeding is part of a larger framework known as a Judicial Council Coordinated Proceeding (JCCP), designed to consolidate numerous civil lawsuits that share common themes concerning the psychological and developmental effects of prolonged social media use. Plaintiffs in this California case assert that several major social media corporations—among them Meta, Snap, TikTok, and Google—knowingly and negligently designed their applications in ways that optimized user engagement to the detriment of young users, exposing minors to measurable harm. Notably, Snap and TikTok have already chosen to settle their portions of the litigation, while Meta remains one of the few defendants continuing to fight the case in court, a decision that raises the possibility that high-profile executives could soon be summoned to testify under oath.
Although it appears improbable that Mark Zuckerberg or other top-ranking Meta executives will be required to testify in person in the New Mexico trial, the proceedings are nonetheless poised to yield material insights into the company’s internal operations and decision-making processes. The significance of this case lies partly in the fact that it represents the first independent, state-led lawsuit against Meta to actually proceed to trial in the United States. Moreover, the substance of the allegations—centered on child sexual exploitation facilitated through technology—imbues the case with substantial emotional and moral weight. The trial will likely hinge on deeply technical arguments, including legal interpretations of what it means to ‘mislead’ the public, complex explanations of algorithmic amplification mechanisms within social media platforms, and debates about the extent of the legal immunity that Meta and other tech companies possess under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.
Even without Zuckerberg’s physical presence on the witness stand, the trial promises to be revealing. Depositions from corporate executives and testimony from other parties involved may offer the public and the court an unprecedented look inside Meta’s evolving policies on underage usage, content moderation, and complaints handling—especially those concerning reports that the company failed to implement sufficient safeguards for younger users. Despite the growing legal pressure, Meta has thus far signaled no intent to pursue settlement. The company continues to deny all allegations leveled against it, maintaining its stance that it has acted responsibly and in accordance with laws intended to keep users safe. Meta spokesperson Aaron Simpson previously told WIRED that the state’s presentation of the case relied on ‘sensationalist, irrelevant, and distracting arguments,’ emphasizing instead Meta’s ‘longstanding commitment to supporting young people’ and affirming that the company remains ‘proud of the progress we’ve made’ while still striving to ‘do better’ in the future.
Outside observers and industry critics have weighed in on the implications of these concurrent trials. Sacha Haworth, executive director of The Tech Oversight Project—an organization that monitors and challenges the power dynamics of major technology companies—noted in a written statement that these simultaneous courtroom battles encapsulate ‘the split screen of Mark Zuckerberg’s nightmares.’ On one side, there is the California trial probing the alleged addictiveness of Facebook and Instagram among young users, while on the other, the New Mexico case exposes claims that Meta’s platforms were exploited by predators to abuse children. Haworth further contextualized the moment by comparing these trials to earlier eras when landmark cases against Big Tobacco and Big Pharma reshaped public understanding and corporate accountability. In her words, ‘these are the trials of a generation,’ signaling that the public may now witness technology executives, including Zuckerberg himself, face the same kind of legal reckoning once reserved for other powerful industries.
The origins of the New Mexico trial trace back to December 2023, when Attorney General Raúl Torrez formally filed the complaint against Meta. His allegations are far-reaching and gravely serious: he asserts that Meta not only exposed minors to explicit material but also permitted conditions where adults could use its platforms to identify, contact, and exploit underage users. The complaint further claims that Facebook and Instagram allowed illegal content—specifically, child sexual abuse material—to be easily located and shared, and that during the course of the state’s investigation, an undercover investigator posing as a mother was able to simulate offering her underage daughter to alleged traffickers through these same platforms, thus emphasizing the systemic gaps in Meta’s content oversight.
The trial is anticipated to span approximately seven weeks, providing ample time for both prosecution and defense to present extensive evidence and witness testimony. Jury selection concluded last week, resulting in a carefully composed panel consisting of ten women and eight men, with twelve jurors and six alternates ultimately seated to ensure the integrity of deliberations. Presiding over the case is New Mexico First Judicial District Judge Bryan Biedscheid, who will oversee what is expected to be a complex and closely watched proceeding that may, depending on its outcome, redefine the legal boundaries of tech company responsibility for user safety online.
Sourse: https://www.wired.com/story/meta-child-safety-trial-new-mexico-attorney-general/
