Meta ordered to pay New Mexico $25 billion in data privacy case

Judge finds company misled users about data sharing and content moderation; state AG says verdict sends 'unambiguous message' to Silicon Valley

By LineZotpaper

Published21 October 2026

Read Time3 min

Sources2 outlets

A New Mexico judge has ordered Meta to pay $25 billion for violating consumer protection laws, after a jury found the social media giant deceived users about its data privacy and content moderation practices for years. The penalty, one of the largest state verdicts against a company in US history, stems from the Cambridge Analytica scandal and allegations that Facebook misled users about how their personal information was shared with advertisers.

Judge Francis Mathew handed down the amount on Wednesday, 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." Torrez said the judgment should be a warning for tech companies.

"This judgment should be a signal, an unambiguous message, to Silicon Valley," Torrez said at a news conference.

Jurors in September found that Facebook 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 focused on a data breach stemming from a third-party personality quiz that harvested data from roughly 87 million profiles and sold it to the political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica to generate targeted ads.

The judge wrote that the company's "most senior leadership," including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and former chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg, made misrepresentations about data privacy policies. "These communications were part of a coherent strategy designed to mislead the public," Mathew wrote.

Forty-eight other states settled with Facebook in a nationwide case, but New Mexico chose to take the company to court on its own. Attorneys for New Mexico had sought $35 billion to $40 billion, arguing the company would only change its ways with a sum large enough to affect its stock price. Meta lawyers argued for no more than $3.4 billion, saying a larger award would violate due process and be unconstitutional.

Meta lawyer Matt Nicholson argued in court that a sum as high as $40 billion would be "shocking to the conscience." Randi McGinn, a lawyer for New Mexico, urged standing up to "tech titans who think they are bulletproof and can do whatever they want."

Meta argued that the state failed to prove that its statements actually harmed New Mexicans. Nicholson said during an October 1 hearing, "The jury didn't make findings that any New Mexican heard or saw these statements, or was harmed by them."

New Mexico prosecutors also argued that Facebook allowed misinformation or violent content to proliferate on the platform. In one of the few wins for the defence, jurors found the state did not prove that Facebook made false claims about removing harmful content, including misinformation about the Covid-19 pandemic. Zuckerberg said in his video deposition that the company has to carefully balance freedom of speech with content moderation.

Under the New Mexico Constitution, fines for violations of consumer protection laws are funneled toward state education spending. Torrez said the money will go into a fund for the state's education system, noting that it "may have paid for the construction of schools for the next 100 years," though the money would be tied up if Meta appeals, as expected.

Meta plans to appeal the verdict. Shares of Meta rose 2% on Wednesday to $707.81.

Analysis

Why This Matters

The $25 billion judgment is among the largest state verdicts against a US company, potentially setting a precedent for other states to pursue their own cases against tech giants over data practices.
The ruling could reshape how social media companies communicate privacy policies to users, particularly regarding data sharing with advertisers and third parties.
The money going to New Mexico's education system demonstrates a direct public benefit from consumer protection enforcement, which may encourage more aggressive state-level action.

Background

The case originated from the Cambridge Analytica scandal, where a third-party personality quiz harvested data from roughly 87 million Facebook profiles and sold it to the political consulting firm for targeted political ads during the 2016 US election. While 48 other states signed an $18 billion settlement with Meta in August, New Mexico opted out to pursue its own trial. The state argued that Facebook's misleading statements about privacy deceived not only its users but the entire population of New Mexico. The jury found Meta liable for more than 43 million violations of New Mexico's consumer protection laws.

Key Perspectives

New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez: The verdict sends an unambiguous message that corporations cannot mislead consumers about data privacy without facing meaningful consequences. The state argued that only a penalty large enough to affect Meta's stock price would force change. Meta and its legal team: The company maintains that the state failed to prove actual harm to New Mexicans and that the penalty is unconstitutional and disproportionate. Meta argues it has since strengthened its privacy and content moderation policies and will appeal. Privacy advocates and critics: The case represents a major victory for consumer privacy enforcement and demonstrates that state-level action can hold tech platforms accountable when federal regulation is limited. Critics caution that an appeal could reduce the penalty or narrow the legal basis.

What to Watch

Meta's appeal process: The company will likely argue that counting violations per person exposed rather than per actual user violates due process, which could reduce the penalty significantly.
Whether other states follow New Mexico's example: Florida also opted out of the multistate settlement and could bring its own case.
The impact on Meta's stock and investor sentiment: If the judgment withstands appeal, it could affect how the company values user data and privacy compliance investments.

Sources

Meta ordered to pay $25 billion to New Mexico in data privacy ruling · Moneywatch - CBSNews.com
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

SupportedA New Mexico judge ordered Meta to pay $25 billion.Moneywatch - CBSNews.com: “Meta has been ordered by a judge in New Mexico to pay $25 billion to the state”
Partly supportedThe judge found Meta misled users about data sharing and content moderation.STV News: “In one of the few wins for the defence, jurors found the state did not prove that Facebook made false claims about removing harmful content, including misinformation about the Covid-19 pandemic.”
Partly supportedThe penalty is one of the largest state verdicts against a company in US history.Moneywatch - CBSNews.com: “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 called the judgment “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.”
SupportedJudge Francis Mathew handed down the amount on Wednesday.Moneywatch - CBSNews.com: “Updated on: October 21, 2026 / 2:44 PM EDT ... Judge Francis Mathew handed down the amount”
SupportedIn September, jurors found Facebook made misleading statements about users 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 judge wrote that Meta's senior leadership, including Zuckerberg and Sandberg, made misrepresentations about data privacy policies.Moneywatch - CBSNews.com: “The jury found that the company's "most senior leadership," including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg and former chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg, made misrepresentations about the service's data privacy policies, the judge ruled.”
SupportedMathew wrote, “These communications were part of a coherent strategy designed to mislead the public.”Moneywatch - CBSNews.com: “"These communications were part of a coherent strategy designed to mislead the public," Mathew wrote.”
SupportedThe case involved a third-party personality quiz that harvested data from roughly 87 million profiles and sold it to Cambridge Analytica for targeted ads.Moneywatch - CBSNews.com: “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 sought $35 billion to $40 billion, while Meta lawyers argued for no more than $3.4 billion.STV News: “The state had sought 35 billion dollars to 40 billion dollars (£26 billion to £30 billion). ... Lawyers for Meta argued for paying no more than 3.4 billion dollars (£2.5 billion).”
SupportedJurors found the state did not prove Facebook made false claims about removing harmful content, including Covid-19 misinformation.STV News: “In one of the few wins for the defence, jurors found the state did not prove that Facebook made false claims about removing harmful content, including misinformation about the Covid-19 pandemic.”
SupportedMeta plans to appeal the verdict.STV News: “Meta plans to appeal against the jury’s verdict”