Meta ordered to pay $25bn to New Mexico in data privacy verdict

Judge rules Facebook deceived consumers about control over personal information, state attorney general calls penalty the largest state verdict in US history

By LineZotpaper

Published21 October 2026

Updated21 October 2026

Read Time3 min

Sources3 outlets

A New Mexico judge has ordered Meta to pay $25 billion to the state after a jury found the social media company liable for deceiving consumers about its data privacy policies, in what State Attorney General Raúl Torrez described as “one of the largest, if not the single largest state verdict against a company in American history.”

Judge Francis Mathew handed down the amount on Wednesday, following a September jury verdict that found Facebook had made false or misleading statements by telling consumers they controlled how their information was shared and by claiming it did not sell or share personal information with advertisers.

The case centred on a data breach stemming from a third-party personality quiz that harvested data from roughly 87 million Facebook profiles and sold it to the political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica, which used the data to generate targeted ads during the 2016 election campaign. New Mexico was the only state to take Meta to trial; 48 other states signed an $18 billion settlement with the company in August.

“This judgment should be a signal, an unambiguous message, to Silicon Valley,” Torrez said at a news conference. The state had sought between $35 billion and $40 billion, arguing that only a sum large enough to affect Meta’s stock price would force a change in behaviour. Meta’s lawyers argued for a penalty of no more than $3.4 billion, calling a larger award unconstitutional and “shocking to the conscience.”

Jurors found Meta liable for more than 43 million violations of New Mexico consumer protection laws. The jury determined that the company’s “most senior leadership,” including Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg and former chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg, made misrepresentations about the service’s data privacy policies. Judge Mathew wrote that “these communications were part of a coherent strategy designed to mislead the public.”

Meta plans to appeal the verdict. The company’s lawyers have argued that the state failed to prove that any New Mexican was actually harmed by the misleading statements and that counting violations based on how many individuals may have heard or seen the statements was unprecedented. They also noted that New Mexico’s consumer protection laws should not apply to people who were not Facebook users at the time.

Meta did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Under the New Mexico Constitution, fines from consumer protection violations go to state education spending. Torrez said the money could fund school construction “for the next 100 years.” Shares of Meta rose 2 per cent on Wednesday, to $707.81.

Analysis

Why This Matters

The $25 billion penalty is one of the largest ever imposed by a state, setting a potential precedent for other states to pursue aggressive consumer protection cases against tech giants.
The verdict reinforces that companies can face massive financial consequences for misleading users about data privacy, potentially shifting corporate behaviour beyond mere settlement costs.
The outcome could influence ongoing and future privacy litigation, as well as legislative efforts to regulate data collection and use.

Background

The Cambridge Analytica scandal, which emerged in 2018, revealed that a third-party quiz app harvested data from millions of Facebook users and shared it with a political consultancy that worked for the Trump campaign. Facebook paid a $5 billion fine to the Federal Trade Commission in 2019 and settled with 48 states for $18 billion in 2024. New Mexico chose not to join that settlement and filed its own lawsuit in 2021, arguing that the entire state population, not just Facebook users, was deceived by the company's public statements about privacy.

Key Perspectives

New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez: The judgment is a warning to Silicon Valley that corporations cannot mislead consumers about data privacy without facing meaningful consequences. All funds will go to education. Meta's legal team: The penalty is unconstitutional and violates due process. The state failed to prove actual harm to New Mexicans, and the company's content moderation policies are robust and must balance freedom of speech. Privacy and consumer advocates (by implication): The verdict demonstrates that state-level action can hold major tech platforms accountable when federal regulation lags, and that juries are willing to impose severe penalties for deceptive privacy practices.

What to Watch

Meta's appeal: The company is expected to challenge both the liability finding and the size of the penalty, potentially reducing the number of violations and the total fine.
Stock market reaction: Shares rose on the day of the ruling, suggesting investors may view the $25 billion as manageable, but any appellate developments could shift sentiment.
Other states' responses: Florida also declined to join the nationwide settlement; its approach may be influenced by New Mexico's outcome.

Sources

Meta ordered to pay $25 billion to New Mexico in data privacy ruling · Moneywatch - CBSNews.com
Meta fined $25bn for 'lies' over user data privacy · BBC News
Meta ordered to pay state $25bn for deceiving users about privacy · STV News

Checked

12 claims in this story checked against 2 sources: 9 supported.

Show each claim

SupportedMeta was ordered to pay New Mexico $25 billion in the data privacy case.Moneywatch - CBSNews.com: “Meta has been ordered by a judge in New Mexico to pay $25 billion to the state after a jury found that the social media company deceived consumers for years about its data privacy policies.”
Partly supportedThe judge ruled Facebook deceived consumers, and Torrez called the penalty the largest state verdict in US history.Moneywatch - CBSNews.com: “Judge Francis Mathew handed down the amount, which New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez described as "one of the largest, if not the single largest state verdict against a company in American history."”
SupportedTorrez said, “This judgment should be a signal, an unambiguous message, to Silicon Valley.”Moneywatch - CBSNews.com: “"This judgment should be a signal, an unambiguous message, to Silicon Valley," Torrez said in a news conference.”
SupportedThe September jury found Facebook made misleading statements about consumers controlling how their information was shared and about not selling or sharing personal information with advertisers.Moneywatch - CBSNews.com: “In September, jury members found that Facebook had made false or misleading statements by telling consumers that they controlled how their information was shared. The social media giant also misled consumers by claiming it didn't sell or share personal information with advertisers, the jury concluded.”
Partly supportedThe case centred on a data breach from a personality quiz that harvested about 87 million profiles and sold the data to Cambridge Analytica for targeted ads during the 2016 campaign.Moneywatch - CBSNews.com: “The case stemmed from allegations that Facebook deceived users about a data breach stemming from a third-party personality quiz that harvested data from roughly 87 million profiles and sold it to a political consulting firm, Cambridge Analytica, to generate targeted ads.”
SupportedNew Mexico was the only state to take Meta to trial, while 48 other states settled for $18 billion in August.STV News: “New Mexico was the only state to pursue a trial around the Cambridge Analytica scandal after 48 other states signed a settlement for 18 billion dollars (£13.4 billion) in August.”
SupportedThe state sought $35 billion to $40 billion, arguing a sum large enough to affect Meta’s stock price would force a change in behaviour.Moneywatch - CBSNews.com: “Attorneys for New Mexico had sought $35 billion to $40 billion, arguing that the company would only change its ways with a sum large enough to affect its stock price.”
Partly supportedMeta’s lawyers sought a penalty of no more than $3.4 billion and called a larger award unconstitutional and “shocking to the conscience.”STV News: “An award 10 times that or even more would violate due process, was unconstitutional and would not hold up under appeal, they said. ... Meta lawyer Matt Nicholson argued in court that a sum as high as 40 billion dollars would be “shocking to the conscience””
SupportedJurors found Meta liable for more than 43 million violations of New Mexico consumer protection laws.STV News: “Jurors in September found Meta liable for more than 43 million violations of New Mexico consumer protection laws”
SupportedMeta plans to appeal, and its lawyers argued the state had not proved New Mexicans were harmed and that counting violations by potential viewers was unprecedented.STV News: “Meta plans to appeal against the jury’s verdict, potentially reducing the number of violations and therefor the total financial penalty. Lawyers for the company said it was unprecedented for the state to count the number of violations based on how many individuals may have heard or seen the misleading statements from the company, arguing there was no evidence these statements ever harmed anyone.”
SupportedTorrez said the money could fund school construction for the next 100 years.Moneywatch - CBSNews.com: “"We may have paid for the construction of schools for the next 100 years," Torrez said”
SupportedMeta shares rose 2 per cent to $707.81 on Wednesday.Moneywatch - CBSNews.com: “Shares of Meta rose $13.56, or 2%, to $707.81 in Wednesday afternoon trading.”