• Who: New Mexico Attorney General Raul Torrez brought a lawsuit against Meta Platforms Inc.
• Why: The state claims Meta misrepresented harms to minors and created a public nuisance through its social media platforms.
• Where: The lawsuit is pending in New Mexico state court.
• How to get help: Has social media impacted the mental health of you or your child? You may qualify to join a social media lawsuit against the platform.

New Mexico’s attorney general is asking a state court to order Meta to pay approximately $3.7 billion to address what the state describes as a “public nuisance” caused by the company’s social media platforms.

The request comes after a jury previously found Meta misrepresented the risks its platforms — including Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp — pose to underage users. The jury also imposed a $375 million penalty in the first phase of the trial.

The case has now moved into a second phase, where the court will determine what additional remedies, if any, Meta must provide.

According to the state, the proposed $3.712 billion abatement plan would fund a 15-year effort to address the alleged harms caused by Meta’s platforms. The plan includes funding for public education, school resources, law enforcement support and mental health services for children affected by issues, such as online bullying and sexual exploitation.

“This request recognizes the scope of the public nuisance that Meta has caused,” counsel for the state argued in court.

The lawsuit alleges Meta concealed or downplayed the extent of harmful activity on its platforms while publicly portraying them as safe for younger users.

Meta disputes liability, challenges proposed abatement plan

Meta denies the allegations and argues there is no legal basis for the sweeping relief requested by the state.

Attorneys for the company contend the proposed abatement plan does not directly address or stop the alleged harmful conduct and instead seeks compensation for downstream effects.

“What no court has ever allowed … is payment for the downstream effects,” Meta’s counsel argued, describing the request as “damages masquerading as something else.”

The court is expected to hear additional testimony during the second phase of the trial before determining whether to approve any form of injunctive relief or financial remedies.

In March, a California jury found Meta and Google liable for mental health harms suffered by plaintiff Kaley G.M., who became addicted to Instagram and YouTube as a child, awarding $6 million in damages, including $3 million in compensatory damages and $3 million in punitive damages.

What do you think about the claims against Meta in this case? Let us know in the comments.

The state is represented by Raul Torrez of the New Mexico Office of the Attorney General and Donald Migliori, Linda Singer, Michael Pendell and David Ackerman of Motley Rice LLC.

The Meta lawsuit is New Mexico v. Meta Platforms Inc., et al., Case No. D-101-CV-2023-02838, in the First Judicial District Court of New Mexico.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

Many Americans don’t like the AI data centers popping up in their communities, though Kevin O’Leary thinks that’s because they don’t fully understand them.

O’Leary, the venture capitalist and “Shark Tank” investor who recently starred as a villainous businessman in “Marty Supreme,” said Americans have misconceptions about data centers and their environmental impact.

“It’s understanding the concerns of people, but at the same time, think about the number of jobs,” O’Leary said in a post on X on Friday.

Addressing environmental worries, O’Leary noted that he graduated from the University of Waterloo with a degree in environmental studies.

“When a group comes to me and says, ‘Look, I have concerns about water, I have concerns about air, I have concerns about wildlife,’ I totally get it,” O’Leary said.

O’Leary has clashed with residents in Box Elder County, Utah, over a new AI data center he’s backing on a 40,000-acre campus.

County commissioners approved the project, which is also backed by Utah’s Military Installation Development Authority, on Monday despite the community opposition. O’Leary said, without providing evidence, that the criticism mainly came from “professional protesters” who were “paid by somebody.”

One major concern for residents about the data center — dubbed the Stratos Project — is that it could strain the water supply. Data centers can use millions of gallons of water each day. Increased utility bills, noise, and a drop in quality of life are also points of contention.

O’Leary said the public misunderstands the impact of data centers because they were “poorly represented” in the past, and that the technology powering them has “advanced dramatically.” He said data centers don’t use as much water as they once did and can use a closed-loop system to avoid evaporation. Data centers can also rely on air-cooled turbines as an alternative to managing the temperature of the computer arrays, he said.

A fact sheet published by Box Elder County said the project won’t divert water from the nearby Great Salt Lake, agriculture, or homes. It also says that Stratos won’t increase electricity prices or taxes.

Many residents, however, are not so sure. The Salt Lake Tribune reported on Thursday that an application to divert water from the Salt Wells Spring stream, near the Great Salt Lake and long used by a local ranch for irrigation, was rescinded after nearly thousands of Utah residents lodged complaints.

“At some point, understanding the value of sustainability, water and air rights, indigenous rights, and making sure the constituencies understand what you’re doing is going to be more valuable than the equity you raise,” O’Leary said on X.

Anjney Midha, a Stanford University adjunct lecturer who appeared on the “Access” podcast this week, would agree with that sentiment. He said that listening to local communities and being transparent about the intentions and impacts of data centers are essential to making them work.

“My view is that if it’s not legible to the public that these data centers and the infrastructure required to unblock this kind of frontier technology progress are serving their benefit, then it’s not going to work out,” Midha said.

In a subsequent post on X on Friday, O’Leary said his project would be “totally transparent.”

“We want it to be the shining example of how you do this,” he said.