A jury in Santa Fe found that Meta misled New Mexico residents about Facebook's data practices and platform policies in a state consumer-protection case stemming from the Cambridge Analytica scandal, Reuters reports.
Jurors found 26 of the 29 statements challenged by the state misleading. They counted more than 43 million violations based on the number of people affected by those statements. Judge Francis Mathew will determine the civil penalties and consider any corrective measures; no monetary award has been set.
What the jury considered
New Mexico's lawsuit focused on statements by Meta executives and company blog posts about how Facebook shared personal information with third parties, handled hate speech and misinformation, and applied its policies to different users. The state argued that those statements gave residents a false picture of the control they had over their data and the consistency of Facebook's enforcement.
The case grew out of revelations that a third-party personality-quiz app harvested information from as many as 87 million Facebook users, which was then used by political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica to build voter profiles. Associated Press reporting from the trial said New Mexico estimated about 350,000 residents were exposed to the breach, while the state asked jurors to consider the wider reach of Facebook's public statements.
The jury did not accept every challenged claim. Reuters reports that it rejected the state's allegations involving some statements about removing harmful content and fact-checking practices.
Penalties and remedies come next
New Mexico filed the lawsuit in 2021. Under the state's Unfair Practices Act, the judge can impose up to $5,000 per violation, though the final amount and the method used to calculate it remain for the court to decide. Attorney General Raúl Torrez said the state will also seek changes that could include corrections to past statements and an audit of Meta's data-management practices.
Meta said it disagrees with the verdict and will continue defending itself. The company argued at trial that the state pulled statements out of context, denied that it sells users' information and said its management of the platforms is protected by the First Amendment.
This verdict is separate from the New Mexico child-safety case that produced a $375 million jury award in March. New Mexico also stayed out of a later multistate settlement that resolved other states' Cambridge Analytica-related claims, allowing this case to proceed to trial.
