Meta ordered to pay $25bn penalty in New Mexico Cambridge Analytica case

State court finds social media giant liable for 43 million violations of unfair practices act

By LineZotpaper

Published21 October 2026

Read Time3 min

Sources3 outlets

A New Mexico court has ordered Meta to pay $25bn in penalties for data privacy violations stemming from the Cambridge Analytica scandal, in one of the largest state-level fines ever imposed on a technology company. The ruling follows a jury verdict in September that found Meta guilty of misleading state citizens about its data collection and safeguarding practices.

The penalty, filed in Santa Fe District Court on Wednesday, was reduced from an initial award of $219.5bn. The jury had found more than 43 million violations of New Mexico’s Unfair Practices Act, each carrying a maximum civil penalty of $5,000. Judge Francis Mathew determined the final sum, noting in the filing that “the extraordinary number of willful violations found by the jury, the duration and repetition of the conduct, the breadth of subjects on which violations occurred, the involvement of senior Facebook leadership” and other factors supported the highest penalty per violation allowed by law.

Interest on the penalty will accrue at 15% per year until the fine is fully paid, the judge added.

“For too long, powerful technology companies have operated as though their size and influence put them beyond the reach of the law,” said New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez in a statement. “This penalty order demonstrates that those violations carry real consequences.”

The case originated from the Cambridge Analytica scandal, which emerged in 2018 and involved allegations that the political consulting firm improperly accessed data from 87 million Facebook users. Former Attorney General Hector Balderas filed the state lawsuit in 2021; Torrez oversaw the trial.

Judge Mathew wrote that following the scandal, “Facebook did not conduct the comprehensive investigation that it promised.” He cited “pressure from senior executives to keep costs down, lack of adequate enforcement resources, inadequate investigative techniques, and a desire not to create precedent for future investigations” as contributing to what he called a “willfully ineffective” internal examination.

New Mexico was not part of the August settlement in which Meta agreed to pay nearly $17bn to a coalition of state attorneys general in a separate federal case concerning child safety and mental health. The state’s Cambridge Analytica case therefore proceeded to trial. In 2022, Meta settled a related class action for $725m.

In a separate New Mexico child safety case, a jury in March ordered Meta to pay $375m, and a judge later required the company to pay $567m into an abatement fund. Meta said it disagreed with that ruling and plans to appeal.

Analysis

Why This Matters

The $25bn penalty is among the largest state-level fines against a tech company, signalling that state attorneys general are willing to pursue cases independently of federal settlements.
The ruling may encourage other states to bring similar claims based on the Cambridge Analytica scandal, especially if Meta’s internal investigation is found wanting.
The high interest rate (15% annually) creates significant financial pressure on Meta to pay quickly or face mounting costs.

Background

The Cambridge Analytica scandal broke in 2018, revealing that the political consulting firm had harvested personal data from millions of Facebook users without their consent. The controversy triggered multiple investigations and lawsuits across the US. Meta (then Facebook) settled a federal class action for $725m in 2022 and later agreed to a $17bn multistate settlement on child safety issues. New Mexico opted out of that federal settlement and pursued its own case.

Key Perspectives

New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez: The penalty demonstrates that violations by powerful tech companies carry real legal consequences. The state argued that Meta’s deceptive practices harmed New Mexico residents and required strong deterrence. Meta: The company has not yet commented on this specific penalty order. In the separate child safety case, Meta said it disagreed with the ruling and planned to appeal. Critics and observers: Some may question whether a state-level penalty of this magnitude will withstand appeal, given that it relies on state law rather than federal privacy statutes. Others note that the penalty, while large, represents a fraction of Meta’s annual revenue.

What to Watch

Meta’s response and whether it will appeal the penalty order.
Whether other states that were not part of the $17bn settlement bring similar Cambridge Analytica cases.
The financial impact on Meta’s balance sheet, given the accruing interest at 15% per year.

Sources

Meta ordered to pay $25 billion over Cambridge Analytica data privacy · Quartz
Meta ordered to pay $25 billion penalty in New Mexico Cambridge Analytica case · Tech
Meta ordered to pay $25 billion penalty in New Mexico Cambridge Analytica case · US Top News and Analysis

Checked

12 claims in this story checked against 1 source: 9 supported.

Show each claim

SupportedA New Mexico court ordered Meta to pay $25 billion in the Cambridge Analytica case.Tech: “Meta was ordered to pay $25 billion in penalties by a New Mexico court on Wednesday as part of a data privacy case that stemmed from the company's Cambridge Analytica scandal from nearly a decade ago.”
Partly supportedThe state court found Meta liable for 43 million violations.Tech: “Although the jury concluded that Meta had more than 43 million violations of the state's unfair practices act”
Not in the sourcesThe penalty was one of the largest state-level fines ever imposed on a technology company.
Partly supportedThe September jury found Meta guilty of misleading state citizens.Tech: “a jury in a Santa Fe courthouse found in September the social media giant liable for misleading state citizens”
SupportedThe penalty was reduced from an award of $219.5 billion to $25 billion.Tech: “The Wednesday filing showed that the state was awarded $219.5 billion, but the penalty was ultimately reduced to $25 billion.”
SupportedThe jury found more than 43 million violations, each carrying a civil penalty of up to $5,000.Tech: “Although the jury concluded that Meta had more than 43 million violations of the state's unfair practices act, with each transgression carrying a civil penalty as high as $5,000”
SupportedJudge Mathew said the jury's findings and other factors supported the highest penalty allowed per violation.Tech: “The extraordinary number of willful violations found by the jury, the duration and repetition of the conduct, the breadth of subjects on which violations occurred, the involvement of senior Facebook leadership”
SupportedTorrez said powerful technology companies had acted as though their size and influence put them beyond the law, and that the order showed violations had real consequences.Tech: ““For too long, powerful technology companies have operated as though their size and influence put them beyond the reach of the law,” said Attorney General Raúl Torrez in a statement. He added that “this penalty order demonstrates that those violations carry real consequences.””
SupportedMathew wrote that Facebook did not conduct the comprehensive investigation it promised, and quoted factors that contributed to a “willfully ineffective” examination.Tech: “Mathew said in the filing that “Facebook did not conduct the comprehensive investigation that it promised” following the Cambridge Analytica revelations. “Pressure from senior executives to keep costs down, lack of adequate enforcement resources, inadequate investigative techniques, and a desire not to create precedent for future investigations,” all contributed to what the judge characterized as a “willfully ineffective” internal examination by Facebook, the filing said.”
SupportedInterest on the penalty will accrue at 15% per year until it is fully paid.Tech: “The judge added that interest on the penalty shall accrue at the rate of 15% each year until the fine is paid off in full.”
SupportedThe Cambridge Analytica scandal involved allegations that the firm improperly accessed data from 87 million Facebook users.Tech: “focused on allegations that the political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica improperly accessed the information of 87 million users”
SupportedNew Mexico was excluded from the August settlement of nearly $17 billion in a separate federal case, so its case proceeded to trial.Tech: “But because New Mexico was not part of the settlement, the state's data privacy case that arose from Meta's Cambridge Analytica scandal proceeded to trial in September.”

Discussion elsewhere

Hacker News103 points · 41 comments →

All the states that participated in the class action settlement got $725 million combined. New Mexico decided to go it alone and gets $25 billion. Great timing for the AG who’s up for reelection on November 3 (even though it was the previous AG who made the call).
bananamogul on Hacker News

The Cambridge Analytica "scandal" is basically an advertising campaign for Meta itself. Their ad platform worked exactly as designed: it allowed creepy, microtargeted advertisements. Instead of dish soap, peptides, and dropshipped garbage, it sold a political candidate. Much wo…
ok123456 on Hacker News