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

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.

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.