New Mexico judge orders Meta to pay $25 billion
The penalty stems from a jury verdict on data privacy claims and joins a series of high-stakes legal losses for the tech giant this year.
By Aiko Soto ·
A federal judge in New Mexico has issued the largest financial penalty yet against Meta, ordering the company to pay $25 billion for violations of state consumer protection laws. The ruling marks a major legal defeat for the social media platform following a contentious trial that concluded last month.
The case originated in 2021 when the New Mexico attorney general alleged that Meta misled users regarding their data handling practices. These claims trace back to the Cambridge Analytica scandal. The state later expanded the lawsuit to include Meta's content moderation policies. A jury sided with the state in September, leading to the multibillion dollar judgment.
Meta has signaled it will contest the decision. C.J. Mahoney, the company's chief legal officer, described the ruling as an attempt to impose a tax on speech. He stated that the enforcement approach makes it "all but impossible to do business in the state of New Mexico" and expressed confidence that the company will win on appeal.
This $25 billion fine adds to a string of legal setbacks Meta faced in 2026. Earlier in the year, a New Mexico jury ordered the company to pay $375 million for child safety violations. A second phase of that same trial resulted in another $567 million order. Additionally, a Los Angeles court found Meta liable for harming a user's mental health through addictive app design, awarding $6 million in damages. In August, Meta agreed to a federal settlement with most US states, committing to pay between $17 billion and $18 billion over a decade for features alleged to harm children.
Despite these large sums, the penalties are small relative to the company's valuation. Meta is currently valued at approximately $1.7 trillion. The judge set the $25 billion figure after the state attorneys requested $35 billion to $45 billion. The theoretical maximum penalty was $219 billion, calculated at $5,000 for each of 43 million violations.
Legal experts suggest that financial pressure alone may not force operational changes. Instead, they point to a combination of factors. Corban Rhodes, a partner at the law firm representing New Mexico, noted that when Meta declines to settle, trial evidence becomes public. He said the New Mexico trial placed more than 100 exhibits on the public record, revealing material that had been secret for over a decade.
One such exhibit is a 2018 email from then-COO Sheryl Sandberg. Sent days after the Cambridge Analytica scandal broke, the email stated that the biggest issue was that "there were a MILLION developers with access to the data." She warned of "many, many, many more moments like this in the next month and year."
Insurers are emerging as another source of pressure. In March, a Delaware judge ruled that insurers have no duty to defend Meta against the thousands of lawsuits it faces. Some experts argue insurers could enforce responsible design practices as a condition for coverage.
Brian Quinn, a law professor at Boston College, said the sharpest pressure might come from shareholders targeting individual directors. Under current indemnification law, executives are protected if they acted in good faith. However, if the same individuals repeatedly appear in litigation, shareholders may demand the company stop indemnifying them. This would leave Meta's executives with less personal financial protection.
The company's stock price fell on Thursday, a drop influenced by the penalty, earnings reports, and heavy spending on artificial intelligence. Regulators and courts are expected to shift their focus from social media effects to AI in the next wave of litigation.
