A trial without jury began this Monday in New Mexico against Meta, parent of Instagram, to determine whether its practices constitute a “public nuisance” by not adequately protecting minors from predators on its platforms.

The case, which is developed before Judge Bryan Biedscheid, arises from a lawsuit filed by Attorney General Raúl Torrez, who accuses the company of designing pr products such as Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp to generate addiction among young people, in addition to not protecting them adequately against risks such as sexual exploitation.

The current phase of the trial centers on determining whether the company's practices constitute a “public nuisance” under state law, which would open the door to imp oner structural changes to its platforms. If confirmed, the failure could force Meta to redesign key functions of its services, at least within the state.

A case with million-dollar and regulatory implications

This judicial process marks the second stage of a legal dispute that already left consequences for the company. In March, a jury concluded that Meta violated him yes of consumer protection by misrepresenting the safety of their platforms for young users, ordering the payment of $375 million dollars in damages.

Now, the prosecutor is seeking much broader sanctions. According to judicial documents, the state could request additional billions It is estimated up to $3.7 billion dollars to finance mental health programs for adolescents over the next 15 years.

In addition to financial compensation, authorities are proposing measures such as strict age verification, elimination of features such as infinite scrolling and automatic playback for minors, as well as adjustments to algorithms to prioritize content considered safe.

Prosecutor Torrez has insisted that the case goes beyond money. As he said in recent days, the goal is to force the s big tech to take responsibility for the impact of their products on the mental health and safety of young people.

Goal warns possible consequences and denies accusations

The defense of Meta maintains that many of the state's demands are “technologically infeasible” and could affect fundamental rights such as freedom ad of expression. In documents filed before the court, the company also stated that it has already implemented multiple tools to protect minors.

A company spokesperson criticized that the state's approach focuses on a single company, ignoring the broader digital ecosystem in which adolescents interact. Likewise, warned that, if certain conditions are imposed, Meta could consider withdrawing its services from the state.

The trial has also put on the table testimonies from families that attribute social networks risk situations for minors, including cases of harassment, contact with predator s and exposure to dangerous content. These stories have been used by the prosecution to strengthen their argument that there is collective damage that justifies judicial intervention.

The outcome of the case is closely followed by authorities throughout the country. More than 40 states and hundreds of school districts have filed similar lawsuits against tech companies, seeking structural changes in the industry.

A ruling in New Mexico could set a national precedent, redefining the legal limits of digital platforms and their responsibility in protecting minors in the United States.