Business · Santa Fe

New Mexico jury finds Meta deceived consumers over data privacy in Cambridge Analytica lawsuit

A Santa Fe jury found Meta Platforms liable on 25 September 2026 for deceiving state residents about data privacy controls and moderation policies following the 2016 Cambridge Analytica scandal.

AI text based on reports by Al Jazeera Online, engadget, Mediafax.ro and other publishers. Published . How it is made

For membersThe first 30 seconds for everyone. Synthetic voice (AI).

In brief

Santa Fe · United States
How it came to this
  1. 2021New Mexico attorney general files consumer protection lawsuit against Meta
  2. August 2026Meta agrees to $18 billion settlement with 47 states; New Mexico opts out of release
  3. 25 SeptSanta Fe jury finds Meta liable for more than two million consumer protection violations

Santa Fe jury verdict

A state jury in Santa Fe, New Mexico, found Meta Platforms liable on Friday, 25 September 2026, for deceiving residents about how it protects personal data and enforces content policies. The decision concluded a two-week trial in a case initially filed by the New Mexico attorney general in 2021. Jurors determined that the company's deceptive statements regarding privacy controls and data broker investigations affected New Mexico's entire population of more than two million residents. In total, the jury held Meta accountable for more than two million separate violations under the state Unfair Practices Act. State prosecutors requested the statutory maximum fine of $5,000 for each individual violation. State District Judge Francis Mathew will determine the total monetary penalties in an upcoming ruling.

Claims over data harvesting and moderation

The lawsuit centered on the fallout from the 2018 disclosures surrounding Cambridge Analytica, a now-defunct political consulting firm that worked on Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign and sought work with a pro-Brexit group. The firm acquired user profile information from as many as 87 million accounts through a third-party personality quiz application without user consent. State attorneys argued that Meta led New Mexico residents to believe they held complete authority over their private data while the company permitted third parties to harvest records. Prosecutors also contended that Meta misled the public regarding how it applied content rules, asserting that the company maintained exceptions for preferred users and allowed misinformation and hate speech to spread when engagement aided financial returns.

“We disagree with the verdict and will continue to defend ourselves against efforts to distort our record.”

Alex Burgos

Meta defense and courtroom arguments

Meta's defense team argued during the proceedings that the state presented cherry-picked quotes from blog posts and executive remarks while omitting context where the company acknowledged ongoing privacy and moderation challenges. Defense attorneys maintained that Meta does not sell user information, is constantly improving platform protections, and derives no benefit from toxic content. During closing arguments, Meta's counsel asserted that New Mexico's five-year investigation produced stale evidence, noting that state investigators identified only one other data breach instance. The company also invoked First Amendment protections, maintaining that social media platforms possess constitutional rights to exercise editorial discretion in curating user interactions and enforcing site policies.

Multistate litigation and regulatory background

New Mexico pursued the Santa Fe trial after refusing to sign a nationwide settlement package. In August 2026, Meta entered into an $18 billion multistate agreement resolving youth safety litigation across 47 states. A clause inside that 130-page agreement included a $459 million payment intended to release Meta from remaining liabilities tied to the Cambridge Analytica breach. New Mexico and Florida refused that release, leaving New Mexico as the sole state taking the privacy dispute to a jury trial. The verdict is the second legal setback for Meta in Santa Fe in six months, following a separate two-part trial that resulted in $942 million in judgments against Meta regarding minor safety controls, alongside judicial orders requiring age-verification systems and daily platform time caps.

Selected tech legal settlements and judgments$M
Multistate Meta youth safety settlement
18000 $M
Previous New Mexico youth judgments
942 $M
Multistate Cambridge Analytica resolution
459 $M
TikTok Alabama youth safety settlement
100 $M

Data from the article text

Ask about this text

Sources and context

Places
Santa Fe

Pollar is free and carries no ads in the text. Its members keep it going.

Support Pollar