A New Mexico state district judge has ordered Meta to pay $25 billion after a jury determined the tech giant misled Facebook users regarding data access and privacy protections. New Mexico state District Judge Francis Mathew issued the ruling, which represents the largest financial penalty ever levied against the company.
The case stems from a jury finding last month that held Meta responsible for more than 43 million violations of New Mexico’s consumer protection laws. During the proceedings, Judge Mathew emphasized the core deception underlying the verdict, stating that Facebook promised users they controlled their data, a promise he described as false.
New Mexico Attorney General Raul Torrez highlighted the historical scale of the judgment during a news conference in Albuquerque, describing the outcome as one of the largest state verdicts against a corporate entity in United States history. Torrez stated that the decision should send an unambiguous message to Silicon Valley. He also announced that all the money awarded in the judgment will be directed into a fund dedicated to the state’s education system.
The penalty dwarfs previous regulatory fines against the platform, far exceeding the $5 billion fine levied against Facebook by the Federal Trade Commission in 2019.
The legal battle began with a lawsuit filed in 2021. The litigation was prompted in part by revelations that Cambridge Analytica, a now-defunct British political consulting firm, improperly obtained the personal data of as many as 87 million Facebook users without their consent. The firm used the harvested data to build targeted political advertisements, counting President Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign among its clients.
Throughout the trial, the state accused Meta of deceiving users regarding who could access their personal information and how harmful content was handled across its platforms. Jurors ultimately determined that 26 out of 29 statements made by Meta and its leadership concerning privacy and content moderation were misleading.
Legal representatives for both sides presented sharply contrasting arguments over potential financial penalties. Meta lawyer Matt Nicholson argued in court that a sum as high as $40 billion would be shocking to the conscience. Nicholson also contended during a hearing that the jury did not make findings that any New Mexican heard or saw these statements, or was harmed by them. Conversely, Randi McGinn, a lawyer representing New Mexico, urged the court to stand up to tech titans who believe they operate above the law and can act with impunity.
Meta plans to appeal the verdict, a legal step that could potentially reduce the final payment amount. CJ Mahoney, Meta’s chief legal officer, criticized the decision in a public statement, expressing confidence that the company will prevail on appeal. Mahoney asserted that the ruling and the attorney general’s enforcement strategy make conducting business in New Mexico nearly impossible, arguing that the lawsuit fundamentally attempts to impose a tax on speech in order to enforce new rules regarding online discourse.
This ruling marks the second major legal defeat for Meta in New Mexico within a six-month period. In March, a separate jury found that the company misled users concerning the safety of young people on Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. In that case, Meta was ordered to pay $375 million in civil penalties, followed by a subsequent order requiring an additional $567 million payment into a state fund dedicated to teen mental health, alongside mandatory measures to protect young users.
