Meta ordered to pay $25 billion penalty in New Mexico Cambridge Analytica case
A New Mexico court ordered Meta to pay $25 billion in penalties on Wednesday, in a data privacy case that grew out of the Cambridge Analytica scandal. The penalty was revealed in a court filing. It follows a September verdict in which a jury in a Santa Fe courthouse found Meta liable for misleading state citizens about how it safeguards and collects user data and prevents harmful information from flourishing on its services.
The jury found more than 43 million violations of the state's unfair practices act, each carrying a civil penalty as high as $5,000. The jury did not set the fine; a New Mexico judge did. The Wednesday filing showed the state was awarded $219.5 billion, but the penalty was ultimately reduced to $25 billion. The source does not say how the reduction was calculated.
Judge Francis Mathew, of the New Mexico District Court, wrote that the factors in the trial record support the highest level of penalty the Act allows, $5,000 per violation found by the jury. He listed them: the extraordinary number of willful violations, the duration and repetition of the conduct, the breadth of subjects on which violations occurred, the involvement of senior Facebook leadership, the size of the New Mexico audiences reached, and the clear intentional and systematic nature of Facebook's repeated misstatements. He also ordered that interest on the penalty accrue at 15% each year until the fine is paid in full.
Mathew wrote that "Facebook did not conduct the comprehensive investigation that it promised" after the Cambridge Analytica revelations. He described Facebook's internal examination as "willfully ineffective" and attributed that to pressure from senior executives to keep costs down, a lack of adequate enforcement resources, inadequate investigative techniques, and a desire not to create precedent for future investigations.
New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez, who oversaw the trial, said in a statement: "For too long, powerful technology companies have operated as though their size and influence put them beyond the reach of the law." He added that the penalty order "demonstrates that those violations carry real consequences." The lawsuit was originally filed in 2021 by his predecessor, Hector Balderas.
Meta chief legal officer C.J. Mahoney criticized the penalty, saying the company is "confident" it will "prevail on appeal." He said the ruling and the Attorney General's approach to enforcement make it "all but impossible to do business in the state of New Mexico," and that the lawsuit "seeks to impose a tax on speech to enforce new rules for what people can say online."
The background: the Cambridge Analytica scandal began in 2018 and centered on allegations that the political consulting firm improperly accessed the information of 87 million users. In 2022, Meta agreed to pay $725 million to settle a class action over it. In August, Meta resolved various Cambridge Analytica-derived data privacy suits across the country as part of a settlement of nearly $17 billion with a coalition of state attorneys general in a separate federal case on child safety and mental health. New Mexico was not part of that settlement, so its case went to trial in September.
Torrez also led a separate child safety trial against Meta in New Mexico. A March jury ruling said Meta should pay $375 million for violating the state's unfair practices act. A judge later ordered Meta to pay $567 million into an abatement fund, after a second phase found Meta's actions created a public nuisance. Meta said it disagreed with that ruling and planned to appeal.
Key facts
- A New Mexico court ordered Meta to pay $25 billion in penalties on Wednesday, down from the $219.5 billion the state was initially awarded per the filing.
- A September jury found more than 43 million violations of the state's unfair practices act; Judge Francis Mathew applied the maximum of $5,000 per violation found by the jury and set 15% annual interest until the fine is paid.
- The judge called Facebook's post-Cambridge Analytica internal examination "willfully ineffective" and said Facebook did not conduct the comprehensive investigation it promised.
- Meta's chief legal officer C.J. Mahoney said the company is "confident" it will "prevail on appeal" and called the case a tax on speech.
- New Mexico was not part of Meta's August settlement of nearly $17 billion with a coalition of state attorneys general, which is why its case went to trial; it has separate child safety rulings of $375 million and $567 million against Meta.
Why it matters
The $25 billion figure is large even after the cut from $219.5 billion, and it comes from a single state's case. It arrives years after the Cambridge Analytica scandal that began in 2018, and after Meta had already paid $725 million in a 2022 class action and joined a nearly $17 billion August settlement with a coalition of state attorneys general. New Mexico stayed outside that settlement and took its case to trial. The judge also went beyond the verdict, finding that Facebook's own internal investigation after the scandal was "willfully ineffective".
Who it affects
Meta is the direct target. The judgment is tied to what the jury found about Meta's statements to New Mexico residents on how it safeguards and collects user data and prevents harmful information from flourishing on its services. Mahoney said the ruling makes it "all but impossible to do business in the state of New Mexico"; the source does not say what Meta plans to do in the state. Attorney General Raúl Torrez frames the order as a message to powerful technology companies in general.
How to use it
This is a legal ruling rather than a product or tool, so there is nothing to adopt. For readers following the case, the practical points are in the order itself: the maximum $5,000 per violation under the New Mexico Unfair Practices Act was applied, and interest accrues at 15% each year until the fine is paid in full. The source gives no deadline or payment schedule.
How solid is it
The account comes from CNBC, which reports on a court filing and quotes from it directly, including Judge Mathew's wording and statements from Torrez and Mahoney. The $25 billion figure, the $219.5 billion initial award and the 43 million violations all come from that reporting. The source does not say how the reduction from $219.5 billion to $25 billion was reasoned, and it gives only 'Wednesday' as the date of the order.
Risks and caveats
The penalty is not final in practice. Meta says it is confident it will prevail on appeal; the source does not say whether an appeal has been filed. Mahoney's characterization of the suit as a tax on speech is Meta's position, not a finding. The jury's violation count and the judge's maximum per-violation rate drove the initial figure, and the source does not explain how the final $25 billion was reached. The earlier New Mexico child safety rulings ($375 million and $567 million) are a separate case, and Meta has said it disagrees with that ruling and plans to appeal it too.
“For too long, powerful technology companies have operated as though their size and influence put them beyond the reach of the law”
— Raúl Torrez, New Mexico Attorney General