Meta Faces $25B New Mexico Penalty in Landmark Privacy Verdict
A U.S. jury ordered Meta to pay New Mexico $25 billion for misleading users on data privacy, a verdict tied to the Cambridge Analytica scandal. The penalty, one of the largest in U.S. corporate history, stems from a 2021 lawsuit alleging Meta’s “friend sharing” feature and favored partner exemptions violated consumer protection laws. The ruling signals increased legal accountability for major tech platforms.
Key points
- Meta was ordered to pay a $25 billion fine to New Mexico on October 21, 2026, following a jury verdict on data privacy claims.
- New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez, who sued in 2021, stated the verdict proves powerful tech companies are not beyond the reach of the law.
- The lawsuit centered on Facebook’s “friend sharing” feature, which allowed third-party apps to access data of users and their friends without explicit consent.
- Although Facebook announced the feature would end by May 2015, the company retained exemptions for favored partners who continued accessing data.
- The verdict marks a landmark victory under New Mexico’s consumer protection law, holding Facebook liable for misleading users about data access and internal policies.
- This penalty is among the largest financial sanctions imposed on a corporation in U.S. history, highlighting growing regulatory scrutiny of Big Tech.
Meta Platforms has been ordered to pay a $25 billion penalty to the state of New Mexico, a verdict that stands as one of the most significant financial sanctions in U.S. corporate history. The decision, issued on October 21, 2026, follows a jury’s finding that the company misled users regarding data privacy practices, a case deeply connected to the Cambridge Analytica scandal. The lawsuit, filed by New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez in 2021, alleged that Meta’s internal policies and data handling mechanisms violated the state’s consumer protection laws.
The core of the dispute involved Facebook’s “friend sharing” feature, which permitted third-party application developers to access personal data of users and their friends, often without the friends’ explicit knowledge. While the platform publicly committed to phasing out this feature by May 2015, allowing users to opt in or out, the jury found that Meta maintained hidden exemptions for favored partners. These partners continued to access data even after the official transition period, leading to allegations that the company’s public assurances were misleading.
Attorney General Torrez described the ruling as a pivotal moment for tech regulation, noting that the verdict challenges the notion that large technology firms operate with immunity from legal oversight. The case also addressed how Meta managed hate speech and misinformation, suggesting that broader internal policies contributed to the consumer protection violations. For the global tech industry, this outcome suggests that state-level consumer laws in the U.S. may serve as a more effective mechanism for holding platforms accountable than federal regulations alone.
Sources
The WireByte editorial team synthesises technology news from multiple primary sources, verifies the facts, and links every source. Articles are produced with AI assistance and reviewed under our editorial policy.
