Meta faces landmark trial in New Mexico with billion-dollar stakes

05 May 2026, 06:03 · The Fresno Bee

Every parent I know has the same nagging worry. Their kid is on a phone, on an app, and nobody can quite say what is happening on the other side of that screen.

For most of the last 20 years, the answer from Silicon Valley has been some version of "trust us." Trust the algorithm. Trust the safety team. Trust the parental controls buried three menus deep.

That trust has been thinning for a while. Whistleblowers have leaked documents. Congressional hearings have piled up. More than 40 state attorneys general have filed lawsuits against the same company. Investors have mostly shrugged and kept buying the dip.

Through it all, the stock has roughly doubled in five years, and the company's market value still sits around $1.5 trillion.

This week, in a Santa Fe courtroom, that whole pattern faces its sharpest test yet. The second phase of New Mexico's landmark child-safety case against Meta (META) opened Monday, and what happens over the next three weeks could change how Facebook and Instagram are designed, who they are marketed to, and how much they cost to run. When I worked through the filings, my read was that the dollar figure is actually the smaller story.

Kira-Yan / Getty Images

Why the New Mexico Meta trial matters now

The second phase of the case is a three-week bench trial. A judge, not a jury, will decide whether Meta's apps qualify as a "public nuisance" under New Mexico law.

That sounds dry. It is not. It is the closest thing the United States has to a forced product-safety review of social media.

State Attorney General Raúl Torrez is asking the judge to force structural changes to Instagram, Facebook and WhatsApp. His list includes rewriting "infinite scroll," reining in push notifications, building real age verification, and installing a court-supervised child-safety monitor inside the products themselves.

The state is also seeking "approximately $3.7 billion in abatement costs," according to Meta's most recent quarterly filing flagged by CNBC.

That headline number is what most people will read. It is not what most analysts I follow are watching. They are watching the product mandates. Force a redesign of how engagement works on Instagram and Facebook, and the most profitable consumer business on the planet has to relearn how it makes money.

Mark Zuckerberg, in a March deposition played for jurors, conceded that perfect safety on platforms used by billions is not a realistic standard, according to coverage in Inc.

More Tech Stocks:

How a 'Big Tobacco moment' got to court

The first phase of this trial ended in March with a near-total loss for Meta. A New Mexico jury found the company liable on every count, including for "unfair and deceptive" trade practices, and ordered $375 million in civil penalties, CNN reported.

A few weeks earlier, a Los Angeles jury reached a similar conclusion in a separate case, finding both Meta and Google's YouTube liable for harms caused to a young plaintiff who said she became addicted to their apps as a child.

Wall Street noticed. Meta shares dropped about 8% on the news and shed more than $100 billion in market cap before recovering, per coverage from Capital.com.

Critics are now calling this stretch Big Tech's "Big Tobacco" moment. The comparison is not casual. Tobacco companies in the 1990s were forced to pay billions for misleading the public about the harms of their products, and their cultural and political power has never returned to its old peak.

Plaintiffs' lawyers are testing the same public-nuisance playbook on social media for the first time. Public-nuisance suits historically come from the physical world, like opioid distribution or industrial pollution, so applying them to a software platform is the legal frontier these cases are charting.

Meta's legal scoreboard so far:

New Mexico jury awarded $375 million in civil penalties in March, per CNN.
A Los Angeles jury found Meta and YouTube liable in March, BBC reported.
More than 40 state attorneys general have filed similar youth mental-health cases, per the Associated Press.
Meta has guided 2026 capital expenditures of $115 billion to $135 billion, per Capital.com.

One legal scholar says the very existence of this trial is the real headline. The fact a public-nuisance theory got this far against an internet company is "a remarkable outcome", Eric Goldman of Santa Clara University's High Tech Law Institute told the Associated Press.

What this means for your kid's feed and your portfolio

Most parents reading this care about one thing. What do Facebook and Instagram actually look like a year from now if New Mexico wins?

If Torrez gets even half the structural relief he is asking for, teen accounts in New Mexico would have a parent attached, age verification would be mandatory at sign-up, and infinite scroll on minors' feeds could be capped or killed. Meta has already warned the bench that some of the mandates are impractical and could even push the company to pull Instagram and Facebook out of New Mexico altogether, per the Associated Press.

Wall Street is doing different math entirely. Meta still owns the most profitable advertising business in human history. The company's market value sits near $1.5 trillion, and the average 12-month price target on the stock is roughly $840.

That gap between fear and fundamentals is why some analysts are urging clients to look past the headlines. Evercore ISI's Mark Mahaney has reiterated an Outperform rating and a $900 price target on Meta, telling clients the legal overhang looks "manageable" relative to the size of the core ad business, according to Capital.com. He estimates users under 13 make up only a mid-single-digit share of Meta's global daily active users, which limits revenue exposure if any one state forces stricter age gates.

A Meta spokesperson, in turn, has emphasized that the company already rolled out 13 new safety measures in the past year and remains committed to age-appropriate experiences, according to CNBC.

Here is my honest take. The $3.7 billion is rounding error for a company that pulled in more than $200 billion in revenue last year. The real risk is that a New Mexico judge writes a roadmap, and 40-plus other attorneys general copy and paste it. That is when the "Big Tobacco" comparison stops being rhetorical and starts showing up in earnings calls. The risk is not the size of the New Mexico check. It is the precedent.

For now, the verdict is in the judge's hands. The bench trial wraps in three weeks. Whatever lands in that ruling will not stay in Santa Fe. And whatever the appeals court does with it next will not be a New Mexico story either. It will be a story about whether the next decade of social media gets designed in Menlo Park, or in 50 different state capitals.

The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.

This story was originally published May 4, 2026 at 11:03 PM.