A court in New Mexico, United States, has ordered Meta Platforms, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, to pay $25 billion following findings that the company repeatedly misled consumers about how their personal information was handled.
The judgment followed a legal battle involving Facebook’s historical privacy practices and allegations that the company failed to give users accurate information about access to their data.
New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez welcomed the decision, describing it as an important step towards holding major technology companies accountable for consumer protection violations.
Meta has disputed the ruling and announced plans to appeal.
Court Finds Widespread Violations of Consumer Protection Law
Judge Francis Mathew ruled that Meta had committed millions of violations of New Mexico’s Unfair Practices Act over an extended period.
The court found that the company’s conduct involved misleading representations about Facebook users’ personal information and the circumstances under which third parties could access it.
According to the judgment, the violations covered activities between 2010 and 2021.
The court concluded that the conduct was deliberate, relying in part on internal company communications and other evidence examined during the proceedings.
The judge imposed a $25 billion civil penalty after considering the scale and duration of the violations.
Cambridge Analytica Scandal Forms Part of Case Background
The legal dispute is connected to longstanding concerns about Facebook’s data-sharing practices, including issues exposed during the Cambridge Analytica scandal.
That controversy involved the collection of information associated with millions of Facebook users and its use in political consulting.
The scandal attracted international attention because Cambridge Analytica worked on political campaigns, including activities connected to the 2016 United States presidential election.
It also raised questions about whether users understood how information collected through Facebook applications could be accessed or used by outside organisations.
New Mexico’s case examined broader allegations about Facebook’s representations to consumers concerning privacy and third-party access to personal data.
New Mexico Attorney General Welcomes Judgment
Attorney General Raúl Torrez said the ruling demonstrated that major technology companies could face legal consequences when their business practices violated consumer protection laws.
The state’s legal team argued that Meta had made misleading assurances about how Facebook users’ information was protected.
Prosecutors maintained that the alleged conduct affected large numbers of consumers over several years.
Torrez said the outcome reinforced the principle that companies must comply with the law regardless of their size or market influence.
Judge Reduces Potential Penalty to $25 Billion
New Mexico authorities had sought substantial financial penalties based on the number of alleged consumer protection violations.
The court’s calculations produced a much larger potential amount before the judge settled on a $25 billion penalty.
Judge Mathew considered the seriousness of the violations and the legal issues surrounding the appropriate size of the award.
Meta had argued that an excessively large financial penalty would be unconstitutional.
The final amount remained far above the level the company considered legally acceptable.
Meta Rejects Ruling, Plans Appeal
Meta’s chief legal officer, C.J. Mahoney, criticised the decision and indicated that the company would challenge it through the appeals process.
The company argued that the penalty imposed an unreasonable burden and raised serious legal concerns.
The planned appeal means the judgment may be subject to further judicial review.
As a result, the $25 billion figure represents a court-ordered penalty rather than confirmation that the full amount has already been collected.
Meta Has Faced Previous Privacy Penalties
The New Mexico ruling adds to a series of legal and regulatory challenges involving Meta’s handling of user information.
In 2019, the United States Federal Trade Commission imposed a $5 billion penalty on Facebook following an investigation into privacy practices.
The company has also faced separate legal proceedings concerning the safety of children using its platforms.
These cases involve different legal allegations and should not be treated as a single proceeding.
Ruling Raises Questions About Technology Companies’ Data Practices
The judgment highlights continuing scrutiny of how major digital platforms collect, manage and share personal information.
Social media companies hold large quantities of user data, making transparency and compliance with privacy laws important consumer protection issues.
The New Mexico case also illustrates the financial consequences that can follow findings of repeated violations.
For Meta, the immediate next stage is its proposed appeal, which could determine whether the penalty is upheld, changed or overturned.
The ruling does not mean Facebook, Instagram or WhatsApp have been ordered to stop operating.
The case remains an important development in the wider debate over consumer privacy and accountability in the technology industry.
Meta’s response
Meta intends to appeal the decision. Its objections include arguments about the size of the penalty and constitutional protections against excessive financial sanctions.
The judgment is therefore a major legal development, but the ultimate amount Meta may be required to pay could change following an appeal.
Background: How the Cambridge Analytica scandal led to the case
The controversy became widely known in 2018 after revelations that Cambridge Analytica had obtained personal information associated with as many as 87 million Facebook users.
The political consulting company used data-driven techniques in connection with political campaigns, including work associated with the 2016 US presidential election.
New Mexico filed its lawsuit in 2021, challenging Facebook’s representations about data privacy and third-party access.
The proceedings went beyond Cambridge Analytica. The jury also found misleading statements concerning Facebook’s handling of misinformation, hate speech and enforcement of its community standards.
