A New Mexico state jury has found Meta guilty of misleading users about its data privacy practices and its enforcement of policies concerning hate speech and misinformation. Following a two-week trial in Santa Fe, jurors determined that 26 of 29 statements challenged by the state were deceptive. Presiding Judge Francis Mathew will now determine the civil penalties Meta faces for more than 43 million violations identified under state law.
Millions of Violations Identified Under State Law
The lawsuit was initiated in 2021 by the New Mexico attorney general’s office against the backdrop of the 2016 Cambridge Analytica controversy, in which an estimated 87 million Facebook users had their personal data harvested by a third-party application. State prosecutors argued that Meta led consumers to believe they held firm control over their personal records, while third-party apps were quietly granted access. New Mexico also presented evidence that the tech giant’s public pledges regarding the removal of misinformation and hate speech did not align with actual internal enforcement. While the jury agreed that Meta misled users on most counts, it rejected claims targeting the platform’s fact-checking systems and specific content removal efforts.
Potential Financial Penalties and Operational Mandates
Under New Mexico consumer protection statutes, each violation carries a civil penalty of up to $5,000, or approximately ₹4.45 lakh. New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez confirmed that his office will seek the maximum statutory penalty permitted by law, though the final figure rests with Judge Mathew. In addition to monetary penalties, the state is asking the court to impose operational mandates on Meta. These requested measures include a court-ordered data management audit and formal public corrections of the statements identified as misleading by the jury.
Meta Pledges Continued Defense Following Split Rulings
Meta rejected the verdict, maintaining that it will continue to defend its conduct and denying that it has ever sold user information. The company asserted that its platforms exist to foster free expression while prioritizing privacy safeguards, adding that the state presented public statements out of context while ignoring Meta’s own acknowledged shortcomings. The decision represents the second major trial defeat for Meta in New Mexico within six months, following a March verdict that penalized the firm ₹333.75 crore for misrepresenting child safety across Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp. While Meta previously resolved similar claims through broad multi-state settlements, New Mexico opted out of those agreements to pursue its claims independently to trial.
Follow for daily updates on cybercrime, corporate fraud, DFIR, hacking, investigations, and digital forensics
