Meta has been ordered to pay $25 billion to the US state of New Mexico after a jury found that Facebook misled consumers about how it collected, shared and protected their personal information in a case linked to the Cambridge Analytica scandal.
New Mexico District Court Judge Francis Mathew issued the judgment on October 21, 2026, following a jury verdict in September that found Facebook responsible for more than 43 million violations of the state’s consumer protection law.
The penalty is among the largest financial judgments imposed on a technology company by a US state. However, Meta has announced plans to appeal, leaving the final amount subject to further legal proceedings.
According to the New Mexico Department of Justice, the jury found that Facebook made misleading statements about how it collected, protected, shared and used consumers’ personal information.
Cambridge Analytica Scandal at the Centre of the Case
The lawsuit stems from revelations that Cambridge Analytica, a political consulting firm, obtained personal data associated with millions of Facebook users through a third-party application.
The information was used to develop voter profiles and support targeted political advertising during the 2016 US presidential election.
The scandal raised concerns about Facebook’s privacy practices and whether users had been adequately informed about how their information could be accessed and used.
New Mexico filed its lawsuit in 2021, accusing the company of misleading residents about who could access their data and how the platform handled personal information.
During the trial, prosecutors argued that Facebook’s public statements gave users an inaccurate understanding of its privacy protections. The jury found that the company had committed tens of millions of violations under state law.
Why the $25 Billion Penalty Is Being Challenged
New Mexico law allows civil penalties of up to $5,000 for each willful violation of its Unfair Practices Act. Applying the maximum penalty to the violations identified by the jury would have produced a figure exceeding $219 billion.
Judge Mathew reduced the amount to $25 billion.
Meta disputes the verdict and has said it will appeal. The company has argued that the state did not adequately demonstrate harm to consumers and has challenged the legal basis for the claims.
Legal experts have also questioned how the violations were counted, particularly whether penalties should apply to people who did not actually see or rely on the allegedly misleading statements.
Reuters reported on October 22 that these issues could form a significant part of Meta’s appeal. The final outcome will depend on the arguments considered by the courts.
Jury Rejected Some Claims About Content Moderation
The case also examined statements Facebook made about its content moderation practices, including claims concerning misinformation and harmful content.
However, the jury did not accept every allegation brought by the state. According to The Associated Press, jurors rejected certain claims that Facebook had made false statements about removing harmful content, including misinformation related to COVID-19.
During a video deposition, Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg defended the company’s approach to content moderation, saying the platform must balance freedom of expression with efforts to address harmful material.
Meta has also argued that it has changed its policies and practices since the lawsuit was filed.
Education Funding Could Benefit if the State Collects
New Mexico officials have said that money collected through the judgment will support education spending in the state.
The timing of any payment remains uncertain because Meta intends to challenge the ruling. Appeals could take years and may result in the penalty being reduced or otherwise changed.
The case highlights the legal and financial risks technology companies face when regulators and consumers challenge their handling of personal information. It also puts renewed attention on the responsibilities of social media platforms to explain their privacy practices clearly.
For now, the $25 billion judgment stands, but the final amount will depend on the outcome of the appeals process.
