A Santa Fe judge ordered Meta Platforms on October 21, 2026 to pay New Mexico a $25 billion civil penalty, after a jury found in September that Facebook committed 43,899,725 violations of the state's Unfair Practices Act through misleading statements about user privacy, content moderation and its app investigation after the Cambridge Analytica scandal. Meta is expected to appeal. The case is a state enforcement action, not a class action, and the money goes to the State — there is nothing for consumers to claim.
Not a Class Action · Nothing to Claim
This article reports a civil penalty ordered in a lawsuit brought by the State of New Mexico. It is not a class action: no class was certified, there is no claim form, and the penalty is paid to the State, not to Facebook users. Meta has said it disagrees with the verdict and is expected to appeal, so the amount is not final. This page is informational and is not legal advice.
What the Judge Ordered
On October 21, 2026, Judge Francis J. Mathew of the First Judicial District Court in Santa Fe entered findings of fact, conclusions of law and a judgment ordering Meta Platforms, formerly Facebook, Inc., to pay the State of New Mexico a $25 billion civil penalty under the state's Unfair Practices Act. The judgment sets the penalty for the violations a jury found on September 25 in the State's 2021 lawsuit over what Facebook told the public about user data, third-party app access and content moderation.The judgment does the math first. It applies the Act's $5,000 maximum to the 43,899,720 unfair-or-deceptive-practice violations the jury found, which comes to $219,498,600,000, and then reduces that award to $25,000,000,000. The judge wrote that the number of willful violations, the conduct's duration and repetition, the involvement of senior leadership, the size of the New Mexico audiences reached, and "the clearly intentional and systematic nature of Facebook's repeated misstatements" supported the highest per-violation penalty the Act allows. The judgment does not explain how the reduced figure of $25 billion was chosen.
The judgment also orders:
- Interest of 15% a year on the penalty until it is paid in full.
- No ruling yet on an injunction. The court reserved the State's request for injunctive relief pending further briefing.
The $25 billion falls between what each side asked for. At an October 1 hearing, the State's trial lawyer, Randi McGinn, asked for $35 billion to $40 billion, according to the Associated Press and Investing.com. Meta asked the court to keep the total to roughly $3.45 billion and argued that a far larger award would violate due process. The judgment rejects Meta's comparison to the $5 billion it agreed to pay the Federal Trade Commission in 2019, finding that earlier penalties, consent agreements and decrees "have not deterred Meta" from deceptive practices in New Mexico. It also cites Meta's 2025 Form 10-K, which reported about $201 billion in revenue and $217 billion in stockholders' equity.
The New Mexico Department of Justice calls the result one of the largest financial penalties against a corporation in U.S. history. Under the New Mexico Constitution, fines for consumer protection violations go to education, and Attorney General Raúl Torrez has said all of the money will go into a fund for the state's schools. Meta has not commented on the amount and is expected to appeal.
What the Jury Decided
On September 25, 2026, after a 13-day trial in Santa Fe, a jury in State of New Mexico v. Facebook, Inc., Case No. D-101-CV-2021-00132, in the First Judicial District Court of New Mexico, Santa Fe County, found that Facebook committed 43,899,725 willful violations of the state's Unfair Practices Act: 43,899,720 for unfair or deceptive trade practices and five for unconscionable trade practices, according to the judgment.The New Mexico Department of Justice filed the case on January 21, 2021. It calls the result the first state-led case of its kind to reach a jury verdict. Judge Francis Mathew presided, and jurors watched video deposition testimony from Mark Zuckerberg and former Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg.
The jury decided whether Facebook broke the law and how many times. The penalty was left to the judge, who set it on October 21.
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
Which Facebook Statements the Jury Found Misleading
The jury found 26 public representations by Facebook and its executives unlawful and willful. According to the judgment, they span more than eleven years, from May 24, 2010 through August 18, 2021, and include statements made personally by Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg. They fall into five subject areas:- Users' control of their data (6 statements): assurances about who could access users' information and how Facebook made money from it. The jury counted 10,459,944 violations for these.
- Friends' data and the post-Cambridge Analytica app investigation (10 statements): the 2014 promise to end apps' access to friends' data, and the 2018 promises to investigate and audit apps, ban developers who misused data, ensure deletion and notify affected users. The jury counted 18,146,592 violations and separately found an unconscionable practice.
- Misinformation (2 statements) and hate speech (5 statements): public statements about Facebook's ability to identify and remove that content.
- Equal enforcement (3 statements): claims that Facebook applied its Community Standards to everyone equally.
The jury did not side with the State on everything. News reports on the verdict described 29 to 34 statements on the verdict sheet, and the Associated Press reported that jurors found the State did not prove its claims about certain content-removal statements, including on COVID-19 misinformation.
For each of the 26 statements, the jury counted either 1,386,648 violations, the number of monthly active Facebook users in New Mexico as of June 30, 2020, or 2,100,000, roughly the state's total population, as the statement's expected audience.
In its findings, the court wrote that Facebook kept making these representations after its own employees and researchers had flagged that it could not make good on them. Among the findings: the app investigation ran from about March 2018 to March 2021 but produced only 14 forensic "audits," and Facebook notified users about only two apps even though its investigation linked at least 2,000 apps to data misuse. The court also found that Facebook's "CrossCheck" system gave high-profile accounts different treatment before enforcement. These are the trial court's findings, which Meta can challenge on appeal.
Zuckerberg and Sandberg Video Depositions
Neither Mark Zuckerberg nor Sheryl Sandberg testified in person. The State played video deposition testimony from both, and the New Mexico Department of Justice has posted the recordings, with a selection of the exhibits used alongside them, on its New Mexico v. Facebook trial exhibits page.Testimony began September 9, 2026 with the first portion of Zuckerberg's deposition, presented by the State's trial lawyer, Randi McGinn. According to Source New Mexico, much of that questioning concerned content moderation and lists of politicians, celebrities and business partners that the State said received special handling under Facebook's "cross-check" system. Zuckerberg said he had limited knowledge of the lists and disputed that Facebook exempted high-profile users from its standards.
Jurors saw a second portion on September 16 focused on Cambridge Analytica, the Albuquerque Journal reported. Asked about a 2019 report that found Facebook did not require app developers to say how they planned to use the data they collected, Zuckerberg said, "I'm not sure how much that would help, but I think it would be useful for us to," and added that "it's useful for developers as a principle to not get access to more information than they need."
Sandberg's video testimony, shown on September 14, addressed the app investigation Facebook launched after the scandal. According to the Albuquerque Journal, she testified that efforts to investigate third-party app developers "hit roadblocks," partly because Facebook lacked updated contact information for them.
Several exhibits the State used with Zuckerberg's testimony are documents the judge later relied on in the October 21 findings: Plaintiff's Exhibits 207 and 208, cited for the finding that the "CrossCheck" system gave certain accounts different treatment before enforcement, and Exhibit 258, cited for the finding that it let content violating Facebook's misinformation policy stay up for extended periods.
Zuckerberg also gave video deposition testimony in New Mexico's separate child-safety trial in March 2026, which concerned different issues. That case is covered in our New Mexico child-safety verdict coverage.
What Happens Next
The $25 billion is not likely to be paid soon. Meta said after the September verdict that it disagrees with it and will keep defending itself, citing a First Amendment right to manage its platforms, and it is expected to appeal. Torrez acknowledged that an appeal would tie up the money. In the meantime, the judgment sets interest at 15% a year until the penalty is paid in full.On appeal, Meta could challenge how the violations were counted. The totals rest on the expected audience for each statement, and Meta's lawyers argued that the jury never found that any New Mexican saw the statements or was harmed by them. A smaller violation count could shrink the penalty. The judgment addresses part of this ground in advance: it says Meta had a full opportunity to contest liability, willfulness and the number of violations, and that the U.S. Supreme Court has not held that the Eighth Amendment's excessive-fines clause applies to corporations.
The State's request for an injunction barring similar practices is still open. The court reserved it pending further briefing.
No Payment to Consumers: Where the $25 Billion Goes
Facebook users will not receive any of the $25 billion. Based on the judgment and statements available as of October 21, 2026, no part of the penalty is set to be paid to users, in New Mexico or anywhere else, and that will not change on appeal:- It is not a settlement. Meta did not settle this case. The jury decided liability, and the judge imposed a civil penalty, which is a fine paid to the State.
- The State is the only plaintiff. The New Mexico Department of Justice brought the case on the State's behalf. No class of consumers was certified, so there is no claim form, no class list and no payment process for individuals.
- The money is earmarked for the State. Attorney General Raúl Torrez has said all of the money will go to a fund for New Mexico's education system.
- The multistate payment does not go to consumers either. The $459,293,017.80 Cambridge Analytica payment in Meta's August 2026 multistate deal resolves claims brought by states and territories, and is paid to them, not to individual users.
The only Cambridge Analytica-era case that paid Facebook users directly was the $725 million consumer class action, In re Facebook, Inc. Consumer Privacy User Profile Litigation. Its claim deadline has passed, and this penalty does not reopen it or add to those payments. Anyone who filed a claim in that settlement can check its status on our $725 million Facebook user privacy settlement page.
The benefit to consumers from this case, if any, would come from an injunction: the State is asking the court to bar Facebook from similar practices in the future. The judge has not ruled on that request.
How the Money Would Reach the State
If the judgment stands, the path runs through the courts first and the state treasury second:- Appeal. Meta is expected to appeal to the New Mexico Court of Appeals, and a further appeal to the New Mexico Supreme Court is possible. Meta can ask to have collection put on hold while the appeal is pending. The Attorney General has acknowledged that an appeal would tie up the money.
- Interest. The judgment adds interest of 15% a year until the penalty is paid in full, roughly $3.75 billion for each year the $25 billion goes unpaid if the amount survives appeal.
- Possible reduction. An appeals court could leave the penalty in place, reduce it, or send the case back. Any smaller amount would still be paid to the State.
- Education. Once collected, the money goes to the State. The New Mexico Constitution directs fines collected under general laws to the current school fund, and the Attorney General has said all of the penalty will go to a fund for New Mexico's schools.
New Mexico residents would benefit only indirectly, through school funding. There is no step in that process where an individual user files a claim or receives a check.
Why New Mexico Went to Trial Alone
In August 2026, Meta reached a multistate settlement of roughly $17 billion over child safety on Instagram and Facebook. Inside that agreement was a separate $459,293,017.80 payment to resolve Cambridge Analytica-era claims of 46 states and two territories, in exchange for a broad release of those claims.New Mexico and Washington, D.C. did not join that Cambridge Analytica release, according to Bloomberg Law, which is why New Mexico's case went to a jury while most states' claims were resolved. The District of Columbia's separate case against Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg is still pending.
The Cambridge Analytica Background
From 2013 to 2015, researcher Aleksandr Kogan ran a Facebook personality-quiz app called "thisisyourdigitallife." About 270,000 people took the quiz, but Facebook's platform let the app also collect data on those users' friends. According to the State, data on about 87 million users worldwide was collected, including roughly 70 million Americans and nearly 350,000 New Mexicans. Kogan sold the data to Cambridge Analytica, a now-defunct political consulting firm whose clients included Donald Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.The State says Facebook learned of the sale by December 2015. The public learned of it in March 2018, when a whistleblower came forward, and Facebook notified affected users the following month. At trial, the State argued that Facebook's misleading statements reached all of New Mexico's more than 2 million residents, not only the users whose data was collected.
Earlier cases over the same scandal were resolved without a trial. Facebook paid a $5 billion Federal Trade Commission penalty and a $100 million Securities and Exchange Commission settlement in 2019. It also paid a $725 million consumer class action settlement, which received final approval in October 2023, and a $190 million Delaware shareholder settlement in July 2025.
Two Different New Mexico Cases Against Meta
New Mexico has won jury verdicts against Meta in two separate lawsuits in 2026, and they are easy to confuse:- Child safety (Case No. D-101-CV-2023-02838): filed in 2023. A jury ordered $375 million in March 2026, and in August 2026 the judge ordered a $567 million abatement fund and new protections for minors, for $942 million in total. See our New Mexico child-safety verdict coverage.
- Cambridge Analytica and privacy statements (Case No. D-101-CV-2021-00132): filed in 2021, the case covered on this page. Liability was decided September 25, 2026, and the judge ordered a $25 billion penalty on October 21, 2026.
Neither case is a class action, and neither pays consumers directly. They are also separate from the social media addiction lawsuits brought by individual families: one of those, a teen plaintiff’s claims against Meta over Instagram, went to trial in Los Angeles on October 28, 2026, alongside claims against Snap. See OCA’s coverage of that trial and the social media and teen mental health lawsuits.
Questions
Is the $25 billion Meta penalty a settlement?
No. A settlement is an agreement between the parties, and Meta did not agree to this. After a 13-day trial, a jury found on September 25, 2026 that Facebook committed 43,899,725 willful violations of New Mexico's Unfair Practices Act, and on October 21, 2026 Judge Francis Mathew entered a judgment imposing a $25 billion civil penalty. Meta argued for a penalty of roughly $3.45 billion and is expected to appeal.
Is the New Mexico Facebook case a class action?
No. State of New Mexico v. Facebook, Inc. is an enforcement lawsuit filed in 2021 by the New Mexico Department of Justice in the State's own name under the Unfair Practices Act. No class of consumers was proposed or certified, so there is no class list, claim form or payment process for individuals.
Can I file a claim or get money from the New Mexico Facebook verdict?
No. State of New Mexico v. Facebook is an enforcement lawsuit brought by the New Mexico Department of Justice, not a class action. There is no class, no claim form and no consumer payment. Any civil penalty is paid to the State; Attorney General Raúl Torrez has said the money would go to a fund for the state's education system.
Where does the $25 billion from Meta go?
To the State of New Mexico, not to Facebook users. The New Mexico Constitution directs fines collected under general laws to the state's current school fund, and Attorney General Raúl Torrez has said all of the money will go into a fund for New Mexico's education system. No part of the judgment sets aside money for individual consumers.
Will Facebook users ever get any money from the $25 billion penalty?
Not from this case. It is a civil penalty in a state enforcement action, so there is no class, no claim form and no consumer payment, and an appeal would not change that. The only benefit to consumers the case could still produce is an injunction against similar practices, which the court has not yet ruled on. Facebook users were paid in a separate case, the $725 million consumer class action settlement, whose claim deadline has passed.
Do New Mexico residents get a payment from the Meta penalty?
No. The penalty is paid to the State as a whole, and the Attorney General has said it is earmarked for education. New Mexicans would benefit only indirectly, through school funding, and only if the judgment survives appeal and Meta pays it.
When will Meta actually pay the $25 billion?
Not until the appeals are over or Meta is ordered to pay while they continue. Meta is expected to appeal, and the Attorney General has acknowledged that an appeal would tie up the money. Appeals in New Mexico can go to the Court of Appeals and then the New Mexico Supreme Court, which can take years. Interest accrues at 15% a year until the penalty is paid, roughly $3.75 billion for each year if the judgment stands in full.
How much will Meta have to pay New Mexico?
$25 billion, under the judgment Judge Francis Mathew entered on October 21, 2026, plus interest at 15% a year until it is paid. The judgment first calculates $219,498,600,000 at the $5,000-per-violation maximum, then reduces it to $25 billion. The State had asked for $35 billion to $40 billion, and Meta for roughly $3.45 billion. Meta is expected to appeal, which would delay any payment, and an appeals court could reduce the penalty.
Is this the same as the $725 million Facebook privacy settlement?
No. The $725 million settlement resolved a separate consumer class action, In re Facebook, Inc. Consumer Privacy User Profile Litigation in federal court in California. Its claim deadline has passed and payments are handled by that settlement's administrator. The New Mexico penalty does not change those payments or reopen that claim process. For payment status, see our $725 million Facebook user privacy settlement page.
Why did New Mexico go to trial when other states settled?
Meta's August 2026 multistate settlement over child safety included a separate $459,293,017.80 payment resolving Cambridge Analytica-era claims of 46 states and two territories. New Mexico and Washington, D.C. did not join that portion, so New Mexico's 2021 case went to trial on September 8, 2026.
Did Mark Zuckerberg testify in the New Mexico Facebook trial?
Not in person. Jurors watched portions of his video deposition, beginning September 9, 2026, covering Facebook's cross-check system and its handling of app developers' access to user data. Former Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg also testified by video deposition. The New Mexico Department of Justice has posted the recordings and selected exhibits on its New Mexico v. Facebook trial exhibits page.
Is this the same New Mexico case as the $375 million Meta child-safety verdict?
No. That is a different lawsuit, State of New Mexico v. Meta Platforms, Case No. D-101-CV-2023-02838, filed in 2023 over child safety. The Cambridge Analytica case is Case No. D-101-CV-2021-00132, filed January 21, 2021, and was tried separately.
Sources
• State of New Mexico ex rel. Torrez v. Meta Platforms, Inc., f/k/a Facebook, Inc., No. D-101-CV-2021-00132: Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Judgment (filed October 21, 2026)• New Mexico Department of Justice: The New Mexico Department of Justice Secures Another Landmark Victory Against Big Tech, with Historic $25 Billion Penalty Against Facebook (October 21, 2026)
• New Mexico Department of Justice: Jury Finds Facebook Violated New Mexico Consumer Protection Law (September 25, 2026), with the redacted jury form
• New Mexico Department of Justice: State of New Mexico v. Facebook pre-trial media fact sheet
• State of New Mexico v. Facebook, Inc., Case No. D-101-CV-2021-00132, First Judicial District Court of New Mexico, Santa Fe County
• Associated Press, via ABC News: Meta ordered to pay New Mexico $25 billion for deceiving users about privacy on Facebook (October 21, 2026)
• Investing.com: Judge orders Meta to pay $25 billion in New Mexico case (October 21, 2026)
• New Mexico Department of Justice: New Mexico v. Facebook Trial Exhibits, including the Zuckerberg and Sandberg video depositions
• Source New Mexico: New Mexico Department of Justice presents Mark Zuckerberg deposition in state's Facebook case (September 10, 2026)
• Albuquerque Journal, via Yahoo News: Jurors view Zuckerberg deposition for a second time in Facebook trial (September 16, 2026)
• Reuters: Meta misled consumers in case over Cambridge Analytica scandal, New Mexico jury says (September 25, 2026)
• Bloomberg Law: Meta Loses New Mexico Trial, Could See $219 Billion Penalty (September 25, 2026)
• Associated Press, via the Tri-City Record: New Mexico jury finds Facebook liable for deceiving users about privacy protections (September 25, 2026)
• Tech Policy Press: The $459 Million Cambridge Analytica Reckoning Buried in Meta's Teen Safety Settlement (August 27, 2026)
