Meta Ordered to Pay New Mexico $25 Billion, Facebook Privacy Lawsuit, Jury Verdict, Appeal and What Users Need to Know

The State of New Mexico won a $25 billion civil-penalty judgment against Meta Platforms, formerly Facebook. Meta has said it will appeal. The judgment does not create a compensation fund for individual Facebook users.

Judgment Status as of October 29, 2026

• Entered: Yes. Judge Francis J. Mathew entered the trial-court judgment on October 21, 2026, ordering Meta to pay $25 billion in civil penalties plus 15% annual interest until paid in full.
• Final? No. Meta says it will appeal, so the amount could be affirmed, reduced or reversed. No appellate ruling has been verified.
• Paid? No. No public notice shows any payment. Whether enforcement is stayed or a bond posted was not verified.
• Still open: The judge reserved a decision on additional injunctive relief, with further briefing pending.
• Payable to: the State of New Mexico, not to Facebook users.
• Can I claim money? No. There is no claim form, settlement fund or individual payout.

Meta $25 Billion Lawsuit: Quick Facts

A New Mexico jury found that Facebook violated the state’s Unfair Practices Act through millions of willful unfair or deceptive trade practices, and the judge then ordered a $25 billion civil penalty. It is described as one of the largest commercial judgments in U.S. history and the first jury verdict against Meta tied to the Cambridge Analytica scandal.

Detail	Information
Case name	State of New Mexico, ex rel. Raúl Torrez, Attorney General v. Meta Platforms, Inc. (f/k/a Facebook, Inc.)
Case number	D-101-CV-2021-00132
Court	First Judicial District Court, Santa Fe County, New Mexico
Judge	Francis J. Mathew
Plaintiff	State of New Mexico, through Attorney General Raúl Torrez
Defendant	Meta Platforms Inc., formerly Facebook Inc.
Original lawsuit	Filed in 2021
Jury verdict	September 25, 2026
Judgment entered	October 21, 2026
Violations found	43,899,725
Statutory maximum calculated	$219,498,600,000
Final ordered penalty	$25,000,000,000
Interest	15% annually until paid in full
Main law	New Mexico Unfair Practices Act
Meta’s position	Disputes the judgment and says it will appeal
Class action?	No. It is a state enforcement action
Individual user payout / claim form	None

What Is the Meta Lawsuit in New Mexico About?

New Mexico’s attorney general sued in 2021 (the case was begun under then-Attorney General Hector Balderas and continued by Raúl Torrez) over what the state called misleading statements Facebook made about how it collected, protected, shared and used personal information. The state also challenged statements about hate speech and misinformation and promises Facebook made after the Cambridge Analytica scandal about investigating third-party apps that misused data.

The state argued these were not isolated mistakes but repeated misrepresentations over years while Facebook profited from engagement and personal data. Meta denied wrongdoing and defended its practices at trial. This was a government enforcement action seeking civil penalties for alleged deceptive trade practices, not a data-breach class action.

What Was the Cambridge Analytica Scandal?

Cambridge Analytica obtained data tied to millions of Facebook users, reported as roughly 87 million, through a third-party personality-quiz app. Under Facebook’s earlier platform rules the app could reach information not only from people who used it but also from some of their friends. The data was used to build voter profiles for political targeting, and 2018 reporting drew regulatory investigations, congressional scrutiny and lawsuits.

The New Mexico case focused on what Facebook told consumers about those practices and what it did after learning that apps had misused user data. The trial covered statements made over many years, not a single unauthorized transfer.

What Did the Jury Find on September 25, 2026?

After a 13-day trial in Santa Fe, the jury found that Facebook made false or misleading statements violating the Unfair Practices Act. The official findings break down as follows:

Category	Number of violations
Willful unfair or deceptive trade practices	43,899,720
Willful unconscionable trade practices	5
Total	43,899,725

(Some summaries cite only the 43,899,720 figure, which leaves out the five unconscionable violations.) The jury’s findings covered 26 specific statements by the company and executives including Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg, made between 2010 and 2021. According to contemporary reporting, 26 of 29 challenged statements were found unlawful, so the jury did not accept every allegation.

Statements About Users’ Control Over Personal Information

The state argued Facebook assured users they controlled who could access their data, while its platform let third-party developers obtain friends’ information without those friends’ consent. The jury found the challenged representations misleading.

Statements About Selling or Providing User Data

The state challenged assurances that Facebook did not sell data to advertisers. The verdict concerned the specific statements and practices at trial, not a rule that all targeted advertising is an illegal data sale.

Promises to Investigate Third-Party Apps

After the 2018 disclosures, Facebook said it would investigate suspicious apps, ban developers who misused data and notify affected users. According to the findings as reported, Facebook identified many apps engaged in abusive data practices but gave users limited notice, and the court discussed evidence involving 1,585 apps that reached the records of over 1.14 million New Mexico users.

Statements About Hate Speech and Misinformation

The jury considered public statements that Facebook removed harmful misinformation, had no incentive to keep hateful content and applied its rules equally to all users, including evidence about a system that exempted high-profile accounts. Some statements were found unlawful and others were not.

The jury’s findings establish liability for the violations it identified. They do not establish that every statement Facebook ever made about privacy or moderation was false.

Why Did the Judge Order $25 Billion Instead of $219 Billion?

The Unfair Practices Act allows civil penalties of up to $5,000 per willful violation. Multiplying 43,899,725 violations by that cap produces the $219,498,600,000 statutory maximum. The violations were counted by multiplying the number of challenged statements by estimates of the New Mexico audience reached, such as roughly 1.4 million monthly Facebook users in one period or about 2.1 million state residents overall.

At the penalty hearing, the state (through outside counsel) asked for about $35–40 billion, arguing that would deter future misconduct while remaining defensible on appeal, and Meta argued for roughly $3.4–3.5 billion. The judge reduced the maximum to $25 billion, citing the number and repetition of violations, their duration, the involvement of senior leadership and the size of the audiences reached. The court also rejected the idea that Meta’s earlier $5 billion FTC settlement should by itself set the penalty here.

What Does 15% Annual Interest Mean?

On $25 billion, 15% is $3.75 billion for a full year before any payments. That is an illustration of the stakes, not a prediction of what Meta will pay, since the judgment can be challenged and stay or bond arrangements can affect timing.

Is Meta Required to Pay the Entire $25 Billion Immediately?

The judgment orders payment, and Meta says it will appeal. Whether enforcement is stayed depends on court orders and procedure, which were not verified. Treat this as an entered trial-court judgment, not money the state has received.

What Laws Did Meta Violate According to the Jury?

The principal statute is the New Mexico Unfair Practices Act, NMSA 1978, § 57-12-1 and following. Section 57-12-2 defines unfair or deceptive trade practices to include certain false or misleading representations in the regular course of business, and defines unconscionable practices, such as taking advantage of a person’s lack of knowledge to a grossly unfair degree. Section 57-12-11 allows civil penalties of up to $5,000 per willful violation in an attorney general’s enforcement action.

The penalty is imposed on behalf of the State of New Mexico. It is not a damages award to everyone who used Facebook.

What Are Meta’s Arguments Against the Judgment?

Meta has denied wrongdoing, and its chief legal officer, C.J. Mahoney, said the company will appeal and is confident it will prevail. Its likely arguments, which are positions, not predictions, include:

• The violation count: that the state cannot count violations by potential audience instead of proof that each consumer saw and relied on a statement.
• Excessive penalty: that $25 billion violates constitutional limits on excessive fines or due process.
• Evidence: that the findings are not supported under the appellate standards.
• Speech: that penalizing statements about platform moderation burdens speech. The state says it was enforcing consumer-protection law against misleading commercial representations.

Meta was represented at trial by Williams & Connolly LLP. No final appellate determination has been verified.

What Happens to the $25 Billion if Meta Wins Its Appeal?

If an appellate court reverses or reduces the judgment, New Mexico could recover less than $25 billion or nothing. If it is affirmed, the state would be in a stronger position to enforce it, subject to any remaining proceedings. The judge’s reserved ruling on injunctive relief means further orders about Meta’s future conduct are still possible, and the penalty and any injunction are separate remedies. Appeals could take years.

Will New Mexico Facebook Users Receive a Share?

No. The state brought the case through its attorney general to obtain civil penalties and other relief. The judgment is payable to the state, and the proceeds are reportedly directed to public education. There is no claim form, settlement administrator, deadline or individual payout, and using Facebook in New Mexico does not entitle anyone to a share.

The court did not award each user a fixed payment. Some users might have separate claims if they suffered legally recognized harm, but those would have to be assessed independently under applicable law and deadlines.

How Is This Different From Other Meta Cases?

The $5 billion FTC settlement (2019). Facebook agreed to a $5 billion civil penalty and privacy requirements in a separate federal matter, with no payment fund for users. For background, see our explainer on Facebook’s $5 billion FTC privacy settlement.

The New Mexico child-safety case. A separate New Mexico lawsuit, No. D-101-CV-2023-02838, alleges Meta’s platforms exposed children to exploitation and mental-health risks. A jury imposed $375 million in civil penalties in March 2026, and an August judgment added $567 million in abatement costs and injunctive relief, for a reported $942 million total. Meta has challenged those rulings. See our report on the New Mexico v. Meta public nuisance case over child safety. New Mexico also declined to join a multistate settlement that Meta reached with most other attorneys general.

The $725 million Cambridge Analytica class settlement (2022). That private class action had its own claims process, which has closed. The New Mexico judgment does not reopen it.

For another privacy matter involving Meta, see WhatsApp privacy class action over Meta and Accenture reading private messages. It involves different allegations from the New Mexico case.

Which Lawyers Represented New Mexico?

The state was represented by the attorney general’s office and outside counsel: Randi McGinn of McGinn Montoya Love Curry & Sievers P.A., and Corban Rhodes, Adam Levitt, Daniel Schwartz, J. Gordon Bergstresser, Emma Bruder, Rebecca Trickey and Amy Keller of DiCello Levitt, along with attorneys from the New Mexico Department of Justice.

Reuters reported on October 23 that, under the firm’s 2025 contract, DiCello Levitt could seek up to about $1.27 billion if New Mexico ultimately recovers the full $25 billion, using declining percentage tiers that include 5% of amounts above $250 million. That is not a court-awarded fee and is not guaranteed. A court is not required to award the maximum, and the amount depends on the recovery and any reduction on appeal.

Meta Lawsuit Timeline

Date	Event
2018	Cambridge Analytica disclosures trigger scrutiny of third-party access to Facebook data
2021	New Mexico files its consumer-protection case against Facebook
September 9–25, 2026	Jury trial on statements about privacy, third-party access, hate speech, misinformation and app misuse
September 25, 2026	Jury finds 43,899,725 violations of the Unfair Practices Act
October 1, 2026	Penalty hearing
October 21, 2026	Judge Mathew enters the $25 billion judgment with 15% annual interest
October 23, 2026	Reuters reports the outside firm could seek up to about $1.27 billion in fees
October 29, 2026	Meta says it will appeal. No appellate ruling verified; injunctive relief still reserved

Meta $25 Billion Lawsuit FAQ

Did a judge really order Meta to pay New Mexico $25 billion?

Yes. On October 21, 2026, Judge Francis J. Mathew entered a judgment ordering Meta to pay $25 billion in civil penalties plus 15% annual interest until paid in full.

Why was Meta ordered to pay $25 billion?

A jury found 43,899,725 violations of New Mexico’s Unfair Practices Act. The judge calculated a statutory maximum of about $219.5 billion and reduced it to $25 billion.

Is the $25 billion judgment final?

No. It is a trial-court judgment, Meta says it will appeal, and the judge reserved a decision on additional injunctive relief. The amount could change on appeal.

Has Meta paid the $25 billion?

No payment has been verified. Whether the judgment is stayed or a bond posted was not verified.

Will Facebook users receive a payment?

No. The penalty is payable to the State of New Mexico, and there is no claim form or individual payout.

What is the case number?

State of New Mexico, ex rel. Raúl Torrez, Attorney General v. Meta Platforms, Inc., No. D-101-CV-2021-00132, First Judicial District Court, Santa Fe County.

What law did Meta violate?

The jury found violations of the New Mexico Unfair Practices Act, which prohibits unfair or deceptive practices and allows civil penalties of up to $5,000 per willful violation under § 57-12-11.

What was the Cambridge Analytica connection?

The lawsuit grew out of disclosures that Cambridge Analytica obtained data tied to millions of Facebook users. New Mexico alleged Facebook made misleading statements about privacy and its response to third-party apps that misused user data.

Did the jury find every Facebook statement false?

No. Reporting says 26 of the 29 challenged statements were found unlawful, and the jury did not accept every allegation.

Is this the same as the $942 million New Mexico child-safety case?

No. They are separate lawsuits with different case numbers and claims. This case concerns statements about privacy and related practices, and the $942 million case concerns child safety and public nuisance.

Is there a new claim form for the $725 million Cambridge Analytica settlement?

No. That was a separate private class settlement whose claims process has closed, and the New Mexico judgment does not reopen it.

Sources and Primary-Record Verification

1. New Mexico First Judicial District Court, October 21, 2026, Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Judgment, No. D-101-CV-2021-00132: https://nmcourts.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/10/Findings-and-Conclusions-21-Oct-26-D101CV202100132.pdf
2. New Mexico Courts, high-profile cases page: https://nmcourts.gov/news/high-profile-cases/
3. New Mexico Department of Justice, September 25, 2026, Jury Finds Facebook Violated New Mexico Consumer Protection Law: https://nmag.gov/press-release/jury-finds-facebook-violated-new-mexico-consumer-protection-law-faces-billions-in-potential-civil-penalties/
4. New Mexico Statutes § 57-12-11, Civil penalty: https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/chapter-57/article-12/section-57-12-11/
5. New Mexico Statutes § 57-12-2, Definitions: https://law.justia.com/codes/new-mexico/chapter-57/article-12/section-57-12-2/
6. Associated Press, October 21, 2026, Meta ordered to pay New Mexico $25 billion for deceiving users about privacy on Facebook: https://apnews.com/article/facebook-penalty-cambridge-analytica-new-mexico-b329f82c3d3db3758a159405acbd4d0e
7. Reuters, October 22, 2026, Meta has strong grounds to challenge New Mexico’s $25 billion penalty, experts say: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/meta-has-strong-chance-getting-25-billion-new-mexico-penalty-slashed-appeal-2026-10-22/
8. Reuters, October 23, 2026, New Mexico’s outside lawyers could collect up to $1.27 billion in Meta case: https://www.reuters.com/world/new-mexicos-outside-lawyers-could-collect-up-127-billion-meta-case-2026-10-23/
9. New Mexico Department of Justice, August 7, 2026, Court Orders Meta to Pay $942 Million: https://nmdoj.gov/press-release/court-orders-meta-to-pay-942-million-and-overhaul-protections-for-children-on-facebook-and-instagram-in-landmark-new-mexico-ruling/

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or create an attorney-client relationship. AllAboutLawyer.com is a legal information website, not a law firm.