New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez won a historic sum of $375 million in a landmark child safety case against Meta earlier this year. But the next stage of the fight could be even more consequential for Meta and the social media industry at large.
Technology
Meta’s historic loss in court could cost a lot more than $375 million
Beginning Monday, attorneys for Meta and New Mexico will return to a Santa Fe courthouse for a three-week public nuisance trial, where they’ll argue over the changes the AG wants the judge to order Meta make to Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. Those changes include adding age verification for New Mexico users, prohibiting end-to-end encryption for users under 18 and capping their use to 90 hours per month, limiting engagement-boosting features like infinite scroll and autoplay, and requiring Meta to detect 99 percent of new child sexual abuse material (CSAM).
“From the outset, our goal was to try and change the way the company’s doing business,” Torrez told The Verge on a recent visit to Washington, DC, to advocate for new kids safety legislation. “I recognize that even at $375 million for a company this big and this profitable, it’s not enough in and of itself to change the way they’re doing business. In fact, there’s probably some folks in that company who think of it as the cost of doing business.”
“Even at $375 million for a company this big and this profitable, it’s not enough in and of itself to change the way they’re doing business”
While any changes ordered by the judge would only apply to Meta and its operations in New Mexico, the company could apply the changes in other states for the sake of simplicity. Or, as it’s threatened to do, it could simply go dark in the state. A court order could send a message to other tech companies that courts may be willing to alter their businesses if they’re found liable.
During the trial, New Mexico will argue Meta has become a public nuisance by creating a public health hazard in the state. The AG’s office expects to call on about 15 witnesses, including experts who will testify to the feasibility of their proposed remedies, and fact witnesses who will testify about Meta’s alleged harms. After Meta makes its defense, Judge Bryan Biedscheid will evaluate which proposals are relevant and feasible — a process that could take some time, compared to the speedy turnaround of the jury verdict in March.
A sweeping win for New Mexico could energize Torrez and thousands of other plaintiffs currently pursuing cases against tech companies. Conversely, a limited order could be a significant blow. The outcome won’t directly impact other cases, but it will almost certainly color negotiations over potential settlements.
Several of Torrez’s requests are hot-button tech policy issues. Age verification would almost certainly require Meta or a third-party provider to collect more personal information on adults and minors alike, which privacy advocates have consistently warned can make users less safe. Don McGowan, who previously served on the board of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), said that barring encrypted communications on platforms like Facebook “is a great way to make sure that nobody uses Facebook Messenger anymore and just moves their activity to other platforms that aren’t touched by this lawsuit.”
The mandate may do little to change the reality of certain parts of the business — Meta recently announced it was getting rid of end-to-end encrypted messaging on Instagram that it said “very few people” actually used.
Peter Chapman, associate director of the Knight-Georgetown Institute, which works to connect policymakers and others with independent tech policy research, said there could be “significant tradeoffs” to a prohibition on encryption, and other changes may be more effective. For example, evidence presented by the state showed that Meta’s own profile recommendations were connecting adults and minors, a feature that poses a clearer danger of harm without much benefit, and which Torrez is also asking the court to stop. “There’s an opportunity to intervene at that level and try to prevent more of these harmful interactions from taking place without having to tackle encryption,” said Chapman.
No single feature change is likely to solve the entire child and teen safety problem, said Chapman, which is why it’s notable that Torrez plans to ask for several layers of changes. Still, the overall effectiveness of any given remedy will also depend on how it’s implemented and monitored. For instance, what would be the methodology Meta uses to report a 99 percent detection rate of new CSAM? How does it count or surmise what it hasn’t caught? The same goes for the accuracy and reliability of any mandated age verification.
Meta points to this potential issue in its argument against Torrez’s proposed remedies. “Regardless of where the accuracy threshold is set, Meta would never be able to prove that the system met that standard, because doing the calculation would require that Meta detect 100% of CSAM to use as the denominator,” the company wrote in a legal filing. Torrez’s chief deputy, James Grayson, said on a press call that the court and an appointed independent monitor would have some discretion over tracking; the office hasn’t yet identified who this monitor would be.
“The demands that are being made in New Mexico are ill-informed and provide massive additional exposure for other kinds of exploitation”
Meta and other groups that oppose the AG’s approach say the outcomes he’s seeking are counterproductive. “The demands that are being made in New Mexico are ill-informed and provide massive additional exposure for other kinds of exploitation,” said Maureen Flatley, president of Stop Child Predators, a group that advocates for more funding for enforcement of criminal laws against child predators, and has received funding from Meta-backed trade group NetChoice. “This notion that the platforms have to be responsible for pushing all these people out would be like saying to the US Bankers Association, ‘By the way, you are responsible for all the bank robberies from now on,’ which is ludicrous.”
“The New Mexico Attorney General’s focus on a single platform is a misguided strategy that ignores the hundreds of other apps teens use daily,” Meta spokesperson Chris Sgro said in a statement. “The state’s proposed mandates infringe on parental rights and stifle free expression for all New Mexicans. Regardless, we remain committed to providing safe, age-appropriate experiences and have already launched many of the protections the state seeks, including 13 safety measures this past year.”
But Torrez has taken aim at the broader tech industry, too. He recently visited Washington, DC, to advocate for new protections for kids online and an overhaul of Section 230, the law that protects tech platforms from being held liable for their users’ posts. “While we were able to prevail in our district court in Santa Fe, I still think the law as it currently exists creates a lot of ambiguity,” he told The Verge on that visit. “If Section 230 were not something that these companies could hide behind, then it increases the chances that they’re going to have to actually make their case to a jury.”
But Chapman said regulation through lawsuits isn’t an “uncommon sort of story” in the US. “Whether that’s tobacco, opioids, e-cigarettes, there is precedent for legal action moving a broader policy conversation.”
Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Earlier this year, more than 25 million Americans began receiving letters from a company most of them had never heard of. The sender was Conduent Business Services, a contractor that processes benefits records and human resources data for state Medicaid programs, employer health plans and government agencies. Between October 2024 and January 2025, ransomware operators pulled names, Social Security numbers, dates of birth, home addresses, medical diagnosis codes and health insurance claim numbers out of Conduent’s systems. In February 2026, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton called it the largest data breach in U.S. history.
The letters ended the way most of these letters end, with an apology, a phone number and an offer of one year of free credit monitoring. Once your data is already out, can you realistically protect your identity on your own, or has it become something most people are better off outsourcing?
Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
- Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox.
- For simple, real-world ways to spot scams early and stay protected, visit CyberGuy.com – trusted by millions who watch CyberGuy on TV daily.
FAKE SSA EMAIL ALERT: SPOT THIS SCAM FAST
Massive data breaches continue to expose sensitive personal information, leaving millions at risk of identity theft. (Daniel de la Hoz/Getty Images)
Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide free when you join.
What you can do for free today
Federal law and tools from the Federal Trade Commission cover more ground than many people realize. None of these cost anything. When used together, they close the most common entry points fraudsters target.
1) Freeze your credit
Start by freezing your credit at all three bureaus. A freeze blocks new accounts from being opened in your name. It has been free at Equifax, Experian and TransUnion since 2018. You can lift it temporarily when you need to apply for credit.
2) Get an IRS Identity Protection PIN
Next, get an Identity Protection PIN from the IRS at irs.gov/identity-theft-fraud-scams/get-an-identity-protection-pin. This six-digit code blocks fraudulent tax returns filed using your Social Security number. The IRS issues a new one each year.
3) Check your credit reports regularly
You should also check your credit reports regularly. Equifax, Experian and TransUnion now offer free weekly access through AnnualCreditReport.com. Checking once every few months can help you catch suspicious activity early.
4) Use IdentityTheft.gov for recovery
It also helps to bookmark IdentityTheft.gov. The site creates a personalized recovery plan, generates the affidavit creditors require and provides prefilled dispute letters.
5) Opt out of prescreened credit offers
Another simple step is opting out of prescreened credit offers. This removes you from mailing lists lenders use for unsolicited credit and insurance offers. You can do this online at OptOutPrescreen at optoutprescreen.com, which is run by the major credit bureaus. The process takes just a few minutes. Choose a five-year opt-out for a quick fix, or print and mail the form for a permanent opt-out. Once processed, you should see fewer “pre-approved” offers in your mailbox.
Free tools can help protect your identity, but they often require time, effort and ongoing attention. (Nastasic/Getty Images)
6) Turn on two-factor authentication
Finally, turn on two-factor authentication (2FA) for every financial, government and benefits account. Even if someone steals your password, they cannot access your account without the second factor.
For many people, these steps create a strong baseline.
When DIY identity monitoring falls short
The do-it-yourself approach works until something goes wrong. That is where the gap becomes clear.
According to the Identity Theft Resource Center’s 2025 Consumer Impact Report, the average victim spent more than 200 hours and $1,343 out of pocket recovering from identity theft. About one in five reported losses above $100,000. Many also reported significant emotional stress.
The financial impact adds up quickly at a national level. A February 2026 report from the U.S. Senate Joint Economic Committee estimates identity theft tied to major data broker breaches has cost Americans more than $20 billion over the past decade. That estimate includes incidents like Equifax, Exactis, National Public Data and TransUnion.
Free tools also have clear limits. They will not monitor the dark web for your data or remove your personal details from data broker sites. They also cannot contact creditors or dispute fraudulent accounts on your behalf.
Instead, you handle every step yourself. IdentityTheft.gov gives you a roadmap, but you still have to make the calls, file the paperwork and follow up repeatedly.
SSA IMPERSONATION SCAMS ARE GETTING MORE PERSONAL
What paid identity protection services add
For anyone whose data was exposed in a breach like Conduent or National Public Data, free tools alone leave real gaps. That is where paid identity protection services come in.
These services run continuous scans for your name, Social Security number, email and bank accounts on the dark web, as well as across data broker and people search sites that resell your home address and family ties. They submit opt-out requests on your behalf and repeat the process when your information shows up again. When fraud happens, many services assign a case manager who works with credit bureaus, banks and creditors to help resolve the issue.
Some plans also include identity theft insurance and dedicated fraud resolution support, which can help cover certain losses and reduce the time it takes to recover.
Paid services have limits. No service can prevent every breach, and even the best monitoring only helps shorten recovery time. The do-it-yourself approach can still work if you are comfortable managing your own checklist. However, for families, for anyone already exposed in past breaches and for those who want less hands-on involvement, adding a paid service on top of free protections can make the process easier to manage.
See my tips and best picks on Best Identity Theft Protection at CyberGuy.com
Paid identity protection services can monitor, alert and step in when fraud happens, helping reduce the burden on you. (Nikolas Kokovlis/NurPhoto)
Kurt’s key takeaways
Most people can handle the basics of identity protection on their own, at least at first. Free tools cover the biggest risks and help block common types of fraud. However, the situation changes once your data is exposed in a major breach. At that point, monitoring, cleanup and follow-up can turn into a long and frustrating process. That is where paid services can make a real difference. They reduce the workload, track exposure across more sources and step in when fraud happens. Still, no service eliminates risk completely. The decision comes down to how much time you want to invest and how much support you would need if something goes wrong. For many households, a layered approach works best. Start with the free protections, then decide if adding a paid service fits your situation.
If your identity were stolen tomorrow, would you have the time and patience to fix it yourself? Let us know by writing to us at CyberGuy.com
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
- Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox.
- For simple, real-world ways to spot scams early and stay protected, visit CyberGuy.com – trusted by millions who watch CyberGuy on TV daily.
- Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide free when you join.
Copyright 2026 CyberGuy.com. All rights reserved.
I’ll never stop gushing about 2-in-1 USB-C cables. They’re really nice to have because, at this point, I’ve amassed so many devices that charge via USB-C. It’s also common for more than one to need to be recharged at a time, which is where they come in handy. I can charge my Nintendo Switch 2 and work-issued MacBook Air, or my Google Pixel 9 Pro and Kindle, without taking up more than one port on the power adapter.
A couple of models that offer up to 140W passthrough charging speeds are currently matching their lowest price to date — including Anker’s braided option, which is available from Amazon and Anker in black or white starting at $14.99 ($3 off). If you don’t mind paying a bit more for a slightly longer cable, Native Union’s recycled 6.5-foot Belt Cable, which features an animal-free leather strap, is down to $23.99 ($6 off) in black or a zebra-like pattern directly from the manufacturer.
While the two cables are slightly different lengths, functionality is identical. Both cables support USB 2.0 speeds topping out at 480 Mbps when connected to a data source, and only the first device connected to the two-headed cable can transfer data. They can also automatically allocate power across devices, depending on the speed of your wall adapter, sending more wattage to the higher-powered of the two devices you have plugged in.
There are plenty of wall adapters that pair well with these cables, too, the kind that deliver zippy charging speeds to your connected devices. One example is Anker’s own four-port 140W charger, which offers three USB-C ports and a USB-A port. Normally $99.99, it’s currently down to $79.99 at Amazon for Prime members.
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Booking a flight can feel like a guessing game. You search once, spot a decent price, come back later and suddenly it is higher. Most people shrug and assume demand changed. Now, a new lawsuit against JetBlue is challenging that idea.
The proposed class action claims the airline tracked a customer’s behavior during the booking process for the purpose of setting or adjusting ticket prices. According to the complaint, that data was collected without clear consent and may have included browsing activity and other user characteristics. The lawsuit also alleges that customers were not informed if their data was being shared or sold to third parties.
JetBlue strongly disputes the allegation. The airline says fares depend on demand and seat availability, not personal browsing behavior. Still, the case taps into a growing concern that goes far beyond one airline.
5 WORRISOME PRIVACY CLAUSES HIDDEN IN SMART HOME DEVICES
A new lawsuit against JetBlue raises questions about how airfare prices are set. (Joan Valls/Urbanandsport/NurPhoto)
Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
- Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox.
- For simple, real-world ways to spot scams early and stay protected, visit CyberGuy.com – trusted by millions who watch CyberGuy on TV daily.
- Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide free when you join.
What the JetBlue lawsuit claims about pricing data
The lawsuit, filed by New York resident Andrew Phillips in federal court in New York, alleges that JetBlue monitored user activity on its website using tracking tools while he searched for flights. According to the complaint, that data was used to help adjust prices in real time.
It also claims that when a user searched for a flight, left the site and later returned to complete the booking, the fare increased. The filing suggests this may have been tied to tracking technology rather than normal pricing changes.
The complaint further alleges that this data was collected without clear disclosure and that users may not have been aware of how their information was being gathered or used.
“Consumers should not have to have their privacy rights violated to participate in the digital race for airline tickets,” the lawsuit alleges.
The airline disputes these claims. In a public statement, JetBlue said it does not use personal data or browsing history to set individual prices and that all customers have access to the same fares at the same time.
CyberGuy reached out to JetBlue for additional comment, but did not hear back before our deadline.
The bigger issue: surveillance pricing in airlines
The lawsuit centers on a concept called surveillance pricing. That refers to companies using personal data to adjust prices for different people. Surveillance pricing extends beyond airlines. It has become a broader concern as more companies rely on AI and advanced analytics.
In theory, two people could search for the same flight at the same time and see different prices based on factors like location, device type or browsing history. Companies rarely confirm this practice outright, but consumer advocates have raised concerns for years.
Airlines have long used dynamic pricing, which changes fares based on demand. The key question here is whether personal data plays a role in that calculation.
How AI is changing airline pricing behind the scenes
Many carriers now rely on artificial intelligence to analyze booking patterns, predict demand shifts and adjust fares in real time. We recently reported on this shift, showing how AI is reshaping the way travelers book flights and how prices are set across the industry. These systems can process large amounts of data at once, including route demand, seasonal trends and competitor pricing.
While airlines say this improves efficiency, it can also make pricing feel less predictable to the average traveler. That is what makes the current lawsuit stand out. It raises the question of whether AI-driven pricing could go a step further by factoring in more detailed data about how people search and book, something airlines like JetBlue say they do not use for individual pricing.
Travelers often see prices change between searches, but the reasons are not always clear. (Chris J. Ratcliffe/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
JetBlue’s viral response and why it matters
300,000 CHROME USERS HIT BY FAKE AI EXTENSIONS
Part of the lawsuit points to a social media exchange that quickly drew attention. A customer posted about a $230 jump in ticket price after checking a flight the day before while trying to book travel for a funeral.
In response, JetBlue suggested clearing cookies or using an incognito window. The comment was later deleted. According to the lawsuit, that response appeared to acknowledge that browsing behavior could influence pricing.
JetBlue disputes that interpretation. The airline said the reply came from a customer service employee and was a mistake. It also stated that clearing cookies or using private browsing would not change the fares available for purchase.
Even so, the exchange struck a nerve. For many travelers, it reinforced a long-standing suspicion that repeated searches or personal data might affect what they pay, even as airlines deny using that information for pricing.
Why airline ticket prices change so fast
Before assuming the worst, it helps to understand how airline pricing works today. Airlines use complex systems that adjust fares constantly. Prices can change within minutes based on demand, available seats, route popularity and competitor pricing.
If a flight starts filling up, the price usually rises. That means a price jump after you return to a search does not automatically point to tracking. It could simply reflect someone else booking a seat or increased demand.
Still, the lawsuit raises a valid concern about transparency. Travelers rarely know what factors are driving the price they see.
What this means to you
JetBlue says it does not tailor prices based on your digital footprint. According to the airline, you are not paying more because you searched twice or used a specific device. Instead, fares shift based on broader factors like seat availability, timing and demand on a route.
That said, prices can still feel unpredictable. Comparing options across platforms remains one of the best ways to avoid overpaying. Acting quickly when you find a fare you like can also make a difference, especially on popular routes.
If you are concerned about tracking, simple steps like using private browsing or switching devices may help limit how much of your activity is visible during repeated searches.
Some travelers also use a VPN to mask their location. While airlines like JetBlue say pricing does not depend on personal data like IP address or browsing history, a VPN can still add a layer of privacy by reducing how much information is shared during the booking process.
For the best VPN software, see my expert review of the best VPNs for browsing the web privately on your Windows, Mac, Android and iOS devices at CyberGuy.com
Take my quiz: How safe is your online security?
Think your devices and data are truly protected? Take this quick quiz to see where your digital habits stand. From passwords to Wi-Fi settings, you’ll get a personalized breakdown of what you’re doing right and what needs improvement. Take my Quiz here: CyberGuy.com
JetBlue denies using personal data or browsing history to set individual ticket prices. (Greg Lovett/Palm Beach Post)
Kurt’s key takeaways
If you have ever felt like flight prices change in ways that do not quite make sense, you are not alone. This lawsuit taps into a bigger question about how much companies know about us and how that information gets used. Airlines like JetBlue say personal data isn’t part of pricing. Still, the way prices change can feel confusing and unpredictable. For now, the best move is to compare prices, take your time and do not assume the first fare you see is the best one.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Are you comfortable with surveillance pricing, or does it cross a line for you? Let us know by writing to us at CyberGuy.com
Sign up for my FREE CyberGuy Report
- Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox.
- For simple, real-world ways to spot scams early and stay protected, visit CyberGuy.com – trusted by millions who watch CyberGuy on TV daily.
- Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide free when you join.
Copyright 2026 CyberGuy.com. All rights reserved.
-
Minnesota3 minutes agoWWII soldier from Minnesota laid to rest more than 80 years after his passing
-
Mississippi9 minutes agoMississippi Lottery Mississippi Match 5, Cash 3 results for May 2, 2026
-
Missouri15 minutes ago
Missouri Lottery Powerball, Pick 3 winning numbers for May 2, 2026
-
Montana21 minutes agoThe announcement of the 2026 Montana AAU Little Sullivan Award winners
-
Nebraska27 minutes agoHow to watch Nebraska-Penn State softball Sunday: Time, TV channel
-
Nevada33 minutes agoNEVADA VIEWS: Ford’s travel raises transparency questions
-
New Hampshire39 minutes ago
NH Lottery Powerball, Pick 3 Day winning numbers for May 2, 2026
-
New Jersey45 minutes ago
NJ Lottery Pick-3, Pick-4, Cash 5, Pick 6 Lotto winning numbers for Saturday, May 2