Undercover investigation of Meta heads to trial in New Mexico in first stand-alone case by state - By Morgan Lee, Associated Press
The first stand-alone trial from state prosecutors in a stream of lawsuits against Meta is getting underway in New Mexico, with jury selection starting Monday.
New Mexico's case is built on a state undercover investigation using proxy social media accounts and posing as kids to document sexual solicitations and the response from Meta, the owner of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp. It could give states a new legal pathway to go after social media companies over how their platforms affect children, by using consumer protection and nuisance laws.
Attorney General Raúl Torrez filed suit in 2023, accusing Meta of creating a marketplace and "breeding ground" for predators who target children for sexual exploitation and failing to disclose what it knew about those harmful effects.
"So many regulators are keyed up looking for any evidence of a legal theory that would punish social media that a victory in that case could have ripple effects throughout the country, and the globe," said Eric Goldman, codirector of the High Tech Law Institute at Santa Clara University School of Law in California. "Whatever the jury says will be of substantial interest."
The trial, with opening statements scheduled for Feb. 9, could last nearly two months.
Meta denies the civil charges and says prosecutors are taking a "sensationalist" approach. CEO Mark Zuckerberg was dropped as a defendant in the case, but he has been deposed and documents in the case carry his name.
In California, opening arguments are scheduled this week for a personal injury case in Los Angeles County Superior Court that could determine how thousands of similar lawsuits against social media companies will play out.
The allegations against Meta in New Mexico
Prosecutors say New Mexico is not seeking to hold Meta accountable for content on its platforms, but rather its role in pushing out that content through complex algorithms that proliferate material that can be addictive and harmful to children.
The approach could sidestep immunity provisions for social media platforms under a First Amendment shield and Section 230, a 30-year-old provision of the U.S. Communications Decency Act that has protected tech companies from liability for material posted on their platforms.
An undercover investigation by the state created several decoy accounts for minors 14 and younger, documented the arrival of online sexual solicitations and monitored Meta's responses when the behavior was brought to the company's attention. The state says Meta's responses placed profits ahead of children's safety.
Torrez, a first-term Democrat elected in 2022, has urged Meta to implement more effective age verification and remove bad actors from its platform. He's also seeking changes to algorithms that can serve up harmful material and criticizing end-to-end privacy encryption that can prevent the monitoring of communications with children for safety.
Separately, Torrez brought felony criminal charges of child solicitation by electronic devices against three men in 2024, also using decoy social media accounts to build that case.
How Meta has responded
Meta denies the civil charges while accusing the attorney general of cherry-picking select documents and making "sensationalist, irrelevant and distracting arguments."
In a statement, Meta said ongoing lawsuits nationwide are attempting to place the blame for teen mental health struggles on social media companies in a way that oversimplifies matters. It points to the steady addition of account settings and tools — including safety features that give teens more information about the person they're chatting with and content restrictions based on PG-13 movie ratings.
Goldman says the company is bringing enormous resources to bear in courtrooms this year, including New Mexico.
"If they lose this," he said, "it becomes another beachhead that might erode their basic business."
Many other lawsuits are underway
More than 40 state attorneys general have filed lawsuits against Meta, claiming it is harming young people and contributing to the youth mental health crisis by deliberately designing features that addict children to its platforms. The majority filed their lawsuits in federal court.
The bellwether trial underway in California against social video companies, including Meta's Instagram and Google's YouTube, focuses on a 19-year-old who claims her use of social media from an early age addicted her to technology and exacerbated depression and suicidal thoughts. TikTok and Snapchat parent company Snap Inc. settled claims in the case that affects thousands of consolidated plaintiffs.
A federal trial starting in June in Oakland, California, will be the first to represent school districts that have sued social media platforms over harms to children.
In New Mexico, prosecutors also sued Snap Inc. over accusations its platform facilitates child sexual exploitation. Snap says its platform has built-in safety guardrails and "deliberate design choices to make it difficult for strangers to discover minors." A trial date has not been set.
The jury weighs guilt, but a judge has final say on any sanctions
A jury assembled from residents of Santa Fe County, including the politically progressive state capital city, will weigh whether Meta engaged in unfair business practices and to what extent.
But a judge will have final say later on any possible civil penalties and other remedies, and decide the public nuisance charge against Meta.
The state's Unfair Practices Act allows penalties of $5,000 per violation, but it's not yet clear how violations would be tallied.
"The reason the damage potential is so great here is because of how Facebook works," said Mollie McGraw, a Las Cruces-based plaintiff's attorney. "Meta keeps track of everyone who sees a post. … The damages here could be significant."
NM congressional delegation calls on FEMA wildfire claims office leader to resign - Patrick Lohmann, Source New Mexico
Members of New Mexico’s congressional delegation on Friday called on the federal official overseeing a multi-billion dollar wildfire compensation fund to resign, following Source NM’s reporting this week that the official had applied for and received a six-figure payout.
According to documents obtained by Source NM and New Mexico PBS, Jay Mitchell, who oversees the Hermits Peak-Calf Canyon Fire Claims Office, and his wife received more than $500,000 in compensation for their home and business far from the wildfire perimeter, even as some victims who were in the direct path of the wildfire remain awaiting compensation.
In the letter Friday afternoon, U.S. Sens. Martin Heinrich and Ben Ray Luján, along with U.S. Rep. Teresa Leger Fernández, all New Mexico Democrats, do not mention the $500,000 payments explicitly. But they allege Mitchell continuously failed to report to Congress on his activities or focus on wildfire victims who needed the most help.
“Jay Mitchell has lost the trust of Northern New Mexico,” the lawmakers said in an emailed statement to Source NM on Friday afternoon. “He must resign.”
In addition to Mitchell’s resignation, the statement calls for an “independent review of the Claims Office’s administrative management of the funding.”
Along with the delegation, New Mexico Rep. Martin Zamora (R-Clovis), earlier on Friday called on Mitchell to resign. He is running against Leger Fernandez, who just started her third term representing the 3rd Congressional District. Zamora specifically cited Source NM’s reporting of the Mitchells’ payouts.
“This corruption is unacceptable,” Zamora said. “New Mexicans who lost homes, businesses, land, and livelihoods have waited years for fair treatment. Learning that a federal official overseeing this program personally profited from it undermines public trust and calls the entire process into question.”
Zamora also criticized Leger Fernández in his statement, saying she had failed to demand “answers and accountability” as problems emerged in the office. “When New Mexicans were desperate for answers, Washington went quiet,” Zamora said in a statement. “Congress has a responsibility to demand accountability from federal agencies. That oversight did not happen here, and wildfire victims were left paying the price.”
Leger Fernández, Luján and Heinrich all took the lead in crafting the Hermits Peak-Calf Canyon Fire Assistance Act, which established a fund and claims process aimed to fully compensate victims of the fire, which the Forest Service ignited in 2022 in two botched prescribed burns.
Since the office’s creation, the delegation has sent repeated letters and issued other public criticism, including most recently in November.
“As authors of the Hermit’s Peak-Calf Canyon Fire Assistance Act, we have been clear that the Claims Office must prioritize working with local communities to restore trust, communicate effectively, and get money out the door as soon as possible to those who suffered most,” the trio’s statement said.
New Mexico bill moves forward to protect license plate data - Nakayla McClelland, Albuquerque Journal
The privacy and safety of drivers in New Mexico is fueling a Democratic-backed bill aimed at limiting the sharing of drivers' personal information gathered from technology.
Senate Bill 40, titled the Driver Privacy and Safety Act, passed its first assigned Senate committee Thursday on a party-line vote.
Specifically, the bill sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Peter Wirth, D-Santa Fe, and several other Democratic legislators would impose regulations and limitations on the sharing of information gathered by automatic license plate readers in New Mexico. There are currently no regulations as to who can access the data, meaning outside agencies such as Immigrations and Customs Enforcement can see the gathered information.
A legislative analysis of the bill said it would prohibit the use of license plate camera data for civil traffic enforcement or surveillance activities not linked to ongoing investigations or law enforcement functions.
In addition, the measure would require law enforcement agencies to submit annual public reports detailing the volume of data collected, the frequency of matched 'hits' against law enforcement databases and how often data was shared or used in a criminal case.
After a lengthy debate about amending language in the bill, the Senate Tax, Business and Transportation Committee voted 6-4 — with Democrats voting in favor and Republicans in opposition — to advance the bill to its next assigned committee as advocates clapped and cheered in celebration.
The bill comes during a time when citizens have had growing concerns about law enforcement agencies such as ICE using personal data to track immigrant community members, activists or people seeking abortion health care.
But Senate Minority Leader William Sharer, R-Farmington, said that while he wants to limit surveillance, he believes the bill was driven by "Trump derangements," which he said troubled him and made him concerned about supporting the bill.
Under the bill, agencies would be required to send in a written request to confirm that the usage of license plate data complies with New Mexico laws. If an agency violated the limitations of the bill, the attorney general or district attorneys would be able to impose a fine of a minimum of $10,000.
Supporters of the bill stood in front of a Senate committee, pleading to lawmakers to pass the bill and stated that it would create a "firewall to freedom."
"We are gravely concerned about the dangers that (automatic license plate reader) ALRP systems pose to reproductive and gender-affirming patients and providers," said Rachel Arrey with advocacy group Bold Futures New Mexico. "It is far too easy for vigilantes and hostile states and federal agencies to use ALPR systems to search for vehicle plates near clinics."
According to a recent American Civil Liberties Union public records request, New Mexico ALPR cameras have been accessed thousands of times by out-of-state law enforcement, including once by Texas law enforcement that was allegedly tracking a woman for seeking abortion care. The records also state that agencies have gone through the data with vague reasonings like "immigration" or "ICE" though the records did not state why or what the search yielded, according to the ACLU website.
Law enforcement agencies use ALPR systems to collect data on drivers in the Land of Enchantment by scanning license plates to capture a vehicle's location in real time and often uses those records to arrest people accused of crimes. The devices are most frequently located on police vehicles or on objects including road signs or bridges, creating detailed records of where people drive.
Bernalillo County Sheriff John Allen wrote a letter to lawmakers in support of the bill, stating that the bill "establishes important safeguards by clearly defining permissible uses, audit requirements and access controls."
Currently, the Albuquerque Police Department stores data from the over 250 ALPRs across the city for over one year, a move that had raised concerns from the American Civil Liberties Union over privacy concerns. In the past, APD only stored data for 60 days until 2023, when the Albuquerque City Council approved a resolution to allow data to be stored for one year.
Sen. Heather Berghmans, D-Albuquerque, said she hopes in the future that lawmakers will also see a bill that deals with the timeframe of the collection of ALPR data, though no bill has been brought forward for this year's session.
Maj. Anthony Montano, speaking on behalf of APD, said the department supported the bill, given that it would not infringe on law enforcement's ability to use the data to fight crime.
Advocates of the SB 40 believe the increased protections would protect all people, including those whose safety would be called into concern from outside agencies.
"Passing this bill is critical to ensure outside authorities can’t turn our surveillance tools against us to target our families and communities," the ACLU wrote on their website prior to the Legislature.
Colorado River governors express cautious optimism after ‘historic’ DC meeting - Caitlin Sievers, Arizona Mirror via Source New Mexico
With the deadline to reach a water usage agreement looming, leaders from the seven Colorado River Basin states expressed cautious optimism that their “historic” meeting in Washington, D.C., would spur the compromise needed to reach a consensus.
U.S. Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum called the meeting at the request of Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs, after the states blew past a Nov. 11 deadline to reach an agreement. The new Feb. 14 deadline was set by the Bureau of Reclamation, which manages water in the West under the Interior Department.
Arizona stands to see the largest cuts if the states can’t reach an agreement, because its Central Arizona Project is one of the newest users of the river water, making it legally one of the first to be cut.
The Colorado River is a vital source of drinking water for 40 million people in the seven basin states, Mexico and 30 Native American tribes, and provides water for farming operations and hydroelectricity.
One of the biggest disagreements between the Lower Basin states — Arizona, Nevada and California — and Upper Basin states — Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming — is over which faction should have to cut back on their water use, and by how much.
“This is one of the toughest challenges facing the West, but the Department remains hopeful that, by working together, the seven basin governors can help deliver a durable path forward,” Burgum, the former governor of North Dakota, said in a statement. “Looking at this as a former governor, the responsibility each of them carries to meet the needs of their constituents cannot be understated, and we are committed to partnering with them to reach consensus.”
The meeting in the nation’s capital lasted more than two hours, Christian Slater, a spokesman for Hobbs, told the Arizona Mirror. The governors of all of the basin states attended the meeting, except for Gov. Gavin Newsom of California, who had a prior family commitment and sent California Natural Resources Secretary Wade Crowfoot in his place.
“It’s actually a pretty historic meeting, and I don’t use those words lightly,” John Entsminger, Nevada’s Colorado River negotiator, said. “I’ve been working on the river for more than 25 years, and I’ve never seen that many governors and a cabinet secretary in one room talking about the importance of the Colorado River.”
In a post on X Friday afternoon, Hobbs described the meeting as meaningful and productive.
“I was encouraged to hear Upper Basin governors express a willingness to turn water conservation programs into firm commitments of water savings,” Hobbs wrote. “Arizona has been and will continue to be at the table offering solutions to the long-term protection of the river so long as every state recognizes our shared responsibility.”
Reaching a water usage agreement is vital to the basin states because the Colorado River’s water supply has been in decline for around 25 years due to a persistent drought spurred on by climate change. The decline is expected to continue into the future.
Water levels in the two major reservoirs on the river, Lake Mead and Lake Powell, have also been in decline for the last quarter century.
“One thing is certain: We’ll have less water moving forward, not more,” New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham said in a statement. “So, we need to figure this out. There is still a lot of work ahead to get to an agreement, but everyone wants an agreement, and we’ll work together to create a pathway forward.”
Lower Basin states want all seven states to share mandatory water cuts during dry years under the new guidelines. But the Upper Basin, which is not subject to mandatory cuts under the current guidelines, argue that they already use much less water than downstream states and should not face additional cuts during shortages.
State negotiators for both the Upper and Lower Basin have said they would prefer a seven-state agreement over alternative river management options proposed by the federal government.
Tom Buschatzke, director of the Arizona Department of Water Resources, told reporters last week that the Grand Canyon State does not like the options proposed by the federal government as they place almost the entire burden for cuts on Lower Basin states.
The Colorado River Compact dates back to 1922, when the seven states made their initial agreement, allocating 7.5 million acre-feet of water each year to be shared by the Upper Basin states and another 7.5 million to be used among the Lower Basin states.
In 2025, for the fifth year in a row, the federal government imposed water allocation cuts on the Colorado River due to the ongoing drought and Arizona’s cut amounts to a loss of 512,000 acre-feet of water for the year.
“Today’s discussion was productive and reflected the seriousness this moment requires,” Colorado Gov. Jared Polis said in a statement. “Since 2022, Colorado and the Upper Basin states have shown up to the negotiating table ready to have hard conversations. We have offered sacrifices to ensure the long-term viability of the Colorado River and we remain committed to working collaboratively to find solutions that protect water for our state, while supporting the vitality of the Colorado River and everyone who depends on it.”
Complicating matters this year is scant snowpack in the Rocky Mountains. Small snowpack means very little runoff, the source for almost all of Colorado’s water.
The Lower Basin states have undertaken significant conservation efforts for Colorado River water since 2014 and have reduced their consumption from 7.4 million acre-feet in 2015 to just over 6 million in 2024.
The Upper Basin states have increased their usage in the past five years, from 3.9 million acre-feet in 2021 to 4.4 million in 2024.
Buschatzke, who attended the meeting in D.C. on Friday alongside Hobbs, has remained insistent that it’s time for the Upper Basin states to do their part. Hobbs’ statement indicated that the states had made some progress toward that.
If the states can’t reach an agreement and are forced to take one of the federal government’s proposals, it will likely lead to litigation — something that the states agree they would prefer to avoid.
“We all have to keep working together,” Entsminger said. “We have to find a compromise, and we have to find a way that the states stay in control of this process and don’t turn it over to the courts.”
Last year, Arizona put a total of $3 million to its Colorado River legal defense fund, and Gov. Katie Hobbs’ proposed budget for this year would put another $1 million toward that fund.
Entsminger said that he thinks the meeting improved the chances of the states meeting the Feb. 14 deadline.
“Whether we have a final deal on February 14 or not, we’re still going to have to keep working,” he said. “That’s not to say I don’t think we’ll meet the deadline, but I do think we keep working until we have a deal, regardless of what day in the future that occurs.”
Jeniffer Solis of the Nevada Current contributed to this report.