New Mexico jury finds Facebook deceived users about data privacy nearly 44 million times

Nearly 44 million violations at up to $5,000 each put the statutory ceiling just under $220 billion ^[4][13]. The judge does not have to go near it ^[4]. At $50 a violation, one percent of the maximum, the total still comes to about $2.2 billion ^[14]. The Record's report does not explain how jurors arrived at the count ^[1].

Meta has paid large sums in this area before ^[19]. It settled a separate kids' online safety case with California in August for $17 billion plus a commitment to reforms ^[18]. The Record puts Meta's penalties across privacy cases in the tens of billions of dollars, and says this verdict could add substantially to that total ^[19][5].

The Cambridge Analytica findings are the part closest to incident response. Facebook made its app-investigation promises in the aftermath of that scandal ^[2]. The case ran under New Mexico's Unfair Practices Act ^[4], so a post-incident pledge was judged the way any consumer claim is judged: against what the company actually did. The jury found Facebook did not carry out the steps it promised ^[2].

The content-moderation findings matter less for data handling. According to the attorney general's press release, jurors found Facebook "willfully" deceived consumers about enforcing its community standards, including the claim that it offered "no special protections for particular groups and no exceptions to its policies for politicians or newsworthiness" ^[9]. Other statements found false included that Facebook deleted "harmful" misinformation and did not profit from misinformation or hate ^[17].

"For years, Facebook operated as if the rules that apply to everyone else didn't apply to them," Torrez said in a statement ^[10]. He called the result "a historic verdict, not just for New Mexico, but for every state fighting to hold Big Tech accountable" ^[11].

So far this is one jury in one state, and no penalty has been set ^[1][3]. A Meta spokesperson did not immediately respond to The Record's request for comment ^[8].