New Mexico asked a judge on Monday to declare Meta Platforms a public nuisance, seeking nearly $3.7 billion in penalties and comprehensive court-ordered changes to the social media giant’s Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. The case cuts to the center of a growing national question: Is the business model behind modern social media fueling the teen mental health crisis?
An increasingly urgent concern shared by parents, educators, and public health officials across the United States lies at the heart of the lawsuit. — that Meta and tech algorithms linked to rising teen depression by designing products that keep young users endlessly engaged.
Lawyers for New Mexico told the court that the company intentionally designed its platforms to maximize minors’ attention and dependency. Evidence is mounting about the psychological harms associated with excessive social media use, they argued.
“Across the country, children are begging for help,” in a Reuters report, David Ackerman, an attorney representing the state, told the court in opening statements. “You will hear testimony that confirms there is a mental health crisis, and that it is fueled and caused by social media.”
New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez’s lawsuit against Meta is part of a widening legal skirmish against technology companies whose recommendation algorithms increasingly define how children socialize, consume information, and see themselves.
The proceedings signal the second phase of the state’s case against Meta. In March, Brant reported that a jury found the company had violated New Mexico’s consumer protection law by misrepresenting the safety of its social media platforms for younger users. The jury awarded $375 million in damages. Meta has said it plans to appeal.
Now, the court is weighing whether Meta’s platforms could be a “public nuisance” under state law. Traditionally, courts reserve the ‘public nuisance’ designation for threats to public safety. But litigation involving tobacco, opioids, and vaping products increasingly uses the designation.
If Judge Bryan Biedscheid finds the designation aligns with state statute, he could order sweeping structural changes to Meta’s platforms in New Mexico. Those changes include mandatory age verification systems, restrictions on autoplay, infinite scroll features for minors, and changes to platform logic prioritizing time-on-screen over health
Meta’s lawyers, however, reasoned that the state was attempting to stretch public nuisance law beyond its limits. An attorney for the company, Alex Parkinson, said New Mexico fell short of demonstrating an impact on the general welfare and instead relied on claims involving harm to individual users. “If social media is a public nuisance,” Parkinson argued, “then so is alcohol because of drunk driving, so are cell phones because of distracted driving, so are supermarkets that sell junk food.”
Still, the issue hanging over the courtroom was not simply legal. It is cultural and generational.
Researchers, lawmakers, and former technology insiders have increasingly questioned over the last decade whether engagement-driven algorithms, particularly those targeting adolescents, are reshaping emotional development and social behavior in damaging ways. Critics framed the issue as an endless cycle of notifications, recommended videos, and curated feeds, creating an attention economy that rewards outrage, comparison, and compulsive use.
Meta has repeatedly defended its platforms. The company said it has invested heavily in safety tools and parental controls for younger users. But the company also admitted in a recent filing to investors that growing regulatory and legal pressure in both the United States and Europe could significantly affect its business and financial performance.
However, for New Mexico, the case is about more than regulation or corporate liability. State lawyers described the lawsuit as a direct challenge to a technology ecosystem they claim has placed profits and engagement metrics over the mental health of children.