New Mexico jury finds Meta liable for user deception in Cambridge Analytica case
A Santa Fe state court jury ruled that Meta misled users about data privacy and content rules, leaving Judge Francis Mathew to assess potential multi-billion-dollar penalties across millions of violations.
New Mexico jury delivers liability verdict
A state court jury in Santa Fe, New Mexico, found Meta Platforms liable on Friday for misleading users regarding data privacy and speech policies on Facebook. The decision concludes a civil trial over the company's handling of personal information and disclosures about third-party application access. Jurors determined that Meta engaged in deceptive practices by misrepresenting user control over private data. The verdict leaves the financial penalties to Judge Francis Mathew, who will assess damages in a subsequent phase. The ruling creates substantial financial exposure for the company, which had sought to defeat claims concerning its earlier data-sharing practices.
Calculation of potential statutory penalties
Under New Mexico law, each statutory infraction carries a civil penalty of up to $5,000. The jury answered 34 specific questions during deliberations, finding Meta liable on the vast majority of claims presented by prosecutors. Courtroom reporting from Bloomberg noted that each affirmed question represents between 1.3 million and 2.1 million distinct violations based on affected state users. If the presiding judge enforces maximum statutory fines across affirmed counts, the total penalty could reach several billion dollars. State authorities pursued the action to establish accountability for representations Facebook made to users regarding account security and digital privacy.
- Harvested Facebook user data is used by political campaigns during the US election and Brexit vote.
- Investigative reports disclose unauthorized profiling of roughly 87 million Facebook users by Cambridge Analytica.
- Facebook pays a $5 billion fine to the FTC to resolve federal privacy investigations.
- New Mexico files a lawsuit against Meta over data deception and content moderation exemptions.
- A Santa Fe jury finds Meta liable on the majority of 34 statutory violation questions.
The Cambridge Analytica data harvesting affair
The courtroom defeat connects to the Cambridge Analytica affair, which became public in March 2018 through investigative reports in the United States and the United Kingdom. Those disclosures revealed that a digital survey created by an academic researcher gathered personal profiles from roughly 87 million Facebook users without consent. The harvested records were transferred to the now-defunct British consulting firm Cambridge Analytica. Political strategists utilized the datasets to target voters during the 2016 US presidential campaign for Donald Trump, as well as during the 2016 Brexit referendum. Although Facebook paid a $5 billion penalty to the Federal Trade Commission in 2019 to resolve federal inquiries, state litigation continued.
Whistleblower claims and First Amendment defense
New Mexico initiated its lawsuit in 2021, expanding privacy claims to address platform governance and free speech. The complaint incorporated whistleblower disclosures alleging that prominent accounts received secret exemptions from standard content moderation rules. Meta expressed formal disagreement with the jury's verdict and confirmed plans to appeal. The company maintains that the US Constitution grants it authority to operate platforms in user interests, stating that its guidelines prioritize free expression while providing users with data protection tools.
Expanding legal scrutiny across social platforms
The New Mexico verdict coincides with broader legal proceedings confronting large social media platforms in the United States. In Montgomery, Alabama, video platform TikTok faces trial over allegations that it fails to protect minors from social media addiction. The Alabama lawsuit, filed in April 2025 against TikTok and parent company ByteDance, claims application features resemble slot machines. State investigators reported that test accounts for teenagers aged 13 to 15 received recommendations regarding self-harm, eating disorders, alcohol, and sexual content. TikTok denied the claims, citing federal statutory protections.
