In March, a jury in New Mexico found Meta liable for violating the state’s consumer protection laws in a case brought by its Attorney General, accusing the company of child exploitation and other safety issues. The court ordered Meta to pay a fine of $375 million in civil penalties. Now, after the second phase of the trial meant to decide whether Meta has been a “public nuisance” harming teen users in the state, the court has ordered the company to pay an additional $567 million into an abatement fund for related programs in New Mexico.
In his ruling, Judge Bryan Biedscheid likened Meta’s platforms to factories, the advertising and other content in them to be the factory’s products and the psychological harm and sexual exploitation of children on those platforms to be pollution they emit. And just as pollution can harm the public’s right to reasonably clean air, the harmful effects of Meta’s apps on children aren’t contained within those platforms. The judge said that those harmful effects “migrate to the internet as a whole and, perhaps most concerning, to the real world.”
The judge clarified that the ruling isn’t seeking to close down Meta’s apps. Instead, it’s looking to address the existing harms they’ve already caused. Meta threatened back in April, however, that it may be forced to shut down its apps in New Mexico if the court sides with the state. It said that the state’s demands were so “burdensome” that “it might force Meta to withdraw its apps entirely.” New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez described the company’s threat as a PR stunt.
The penalty Meta has been ordered to pay will go towards several different programs, including youth internet safety training for teachers, school counselors, school psychologists and healthcare professionals, as well as community-based health centers. In addition to paying the fine, the court has ordered Meta to incorporate changes and safety measures into Facebook and Instagram. It has determined that WhatsApp doesn’t contribute to public nuisance and, hence, any required changes will not apply to it.
Meta will have to maintain a private-by-default setting for users under 18 years of age on Instagram. If a user on Facebook is under 18, it also has to limit their friends to users under 18 years of age by default. Private accounts for underage users cannot show up in a search unless identified by username, and they cannot be recommended to other users. Those users cannot change default settings without the consent of a parent or a guardian, or unless they show proof that they’ve already turned 18.
The company’s platforms cannot recommend any account belonging to users under 18 and must ensure that adults who aren’t connected to underage users cannot message them. Meta has to pause push notifications for the same users from 10PM to 7AM everyday and from 8AM to 3PM during the academic year, excluding weekends. It has to hide “like counts” for users under 18 and to implement a mandatory usage time limit, as well. Specifically, teens can only spend 90 hours per month across Facebook and Instagram. Meta also has to flash information banners for underage users once a day, telling them about safe practices and tools they can use to report inappropriate behavior and content. The court didn’t grant the plaintiff’s request to order changes to Meta’s algorithms, however, despite its argument that they create harmful feedback loops.
On X, Meta’s Andy Stone said the company disagrees with the ruling and will appeal.
Meta statement on the ruling:
“We disagree with the ruling and will appeal. We work hard to keep people safe on our platforms and have been transparent about the challenges of identifying and removing bad actors and harmful content. We remain confident in our record of… https://t.co/Yq9eYyNBQq
— Andy Stone (@andymstone) August 6, 2026