Judge Orders Meta to Pay $25 Billion in New Mexico Over Data Privacy Deceptions

Key points

• Judge Francis Mathew set the penalty at $25 billion, reducing a jury-calculated liability of $219.5 billion.
• The jury found Meta committed over 43 million violations of New Mexico’s unfair practices act between 2010 and 2021.
• Meta’s chief legal officer, C.J. Mahoney, stated the company will appeal, arguing the ruling imposes a tax on speech.
• New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez called the verdict the largest state judgment against a company in U.S. history.
• The fine will be directed to state education funds under New Mexico law, though funds may be tied up during appeals.

Background

This case follows a September 2026 jury verdict in New Mexico that found Meta liable for deceiving users about data safeguards related to the 2018 Cambridge Analytica scandal. The state had previously settled a separate child safety case with Meta for over $1 billion in 2026, while 48 other states settled a nationwide data privacy case with Facebook in 2020. Meta also paid a $5 billion FTC fine in 2019 for similar privacy violations.

How outlets are covering it

CBS News and CNBC emphasize the scale of the penalty and the jury’s finding of 43 million violations, noting the judge’s reduction from $219.5 billion to $25 billion. BBC highlights the judge’s characterization of Meta’s statements as 'lies' that extended to core business practices, including content moderation. All three sources report Meta’s planned appeal and C.J. Mahoney’s claim that the ruling makes it 'impossible to do business' in New Mexico. New Mexico’s Attorney General framed the case as a test of corporate accountability, while Meta argued the fine was unconstitutional and exceeded due process limits.

Why it matters

The $25 billion penalty is the largest ever against Meta and signals a shift in state-level enforcement against tech giants. It may influence future litigation in other states and set a precedent for holding companies accountable for long-term data privacy misrepresentations. The ruling also underscores growing scrutiny of Big Tech’s influence on public discourse and consumer trust.

What to watch

Meta has indicated it will appeal the decision, which could delay payment and tie up the funds. The outcome of the appeal may determine whether the penalty is upheld or reduced. Other states may use this case as a model for similar lawsuits against tech companies over data privacy and content moderation practices.