Developing
Whether injunctive relief was granted and whether a final judgment has been entered are not stated; reports differ on the number of misleading statements.
In 60 seconds
- State judge Francis Mathew ordered Meta to pay $25 billion; he found more than $219 billion warranted, then reduced it.
- Jurors found more than 43 million violations at up to $5,000 each; the state sought $35-40 billion and Meta argued for no more than about $3.4 billion.
- The September 25 verdict found misleading statements (26 of 29 per Reuters, 34 assessments per the AP); the jury rejected claims about removing harmful content.
- PPC Land's arithmetic puts $25 billion at about $569 per violation; interest accrues during appeal.
Impact Layer
- What changed
- One of the largest penalties under a US state consumer protection law has been ordered against Meta.
- Why it matters
- It shows that privacy and safety statements by platforms can carry very large liability, with consequences for ad revenue and compliance.
- Who is affected
- Platforms, advertisers and privacy and legal teams.
- Martech stack area
- Advertising, Data
- Stack impact
- Review public privacy and safety claims for accuracy; the ruling treats each misleading statement viewed by a user as a possible violation.
- Business impact
- High Based on PPC Land's reading of Reuters and AP reports. The statute's name, final judgment status and injunctive relief are not stated, and the reports conflict on the August multistate settlement ($18 billion per the AP, $17.1 billion per Reuters).
- Related technologies
- What to watch
- Meta's appeal, any injunction and the final judgment.
On Wednesday, October 21, 2026, Santa Fe state judge Francis Mathew ordered Meta to pay $25 billion, after a jury trial, according to PPC Land. The case is cited as D-101-CV-2021-00132 under New Mexico’s Unfair Practices Act.
The numbers
- Mathew found a penalty of more than $219 billion warranted, then reduced it to $25 billion (Reuters).
- The state’s law allows up to $5,000 per violation; jurors found more than 43 million violations. PPC Land’s arithmetic puts $25 billion at about $569 per violation.
- The state sought $35-40 billion; Meta argued for no more than about $3.4 billion (AP) or $3.45 billion (Reuters).
The verdict
On September 25, jurors found statements misleading: 26 of 29 per Reuters, 34 assessments per the AP; the two counts are not reconciled. Jurors rejected the state’s claims about removing harmful content, including COVID-19 misinformation. Mathew said Facebook’s wrongdoing “goes to the heart of Facebook’s core business practices”.
What happens next
Meta plans to appeal and has argued that counting violations per viewer is unprecedented. Interest accrues during appeal. Meta’s shares rose about 2% (AP).
Not stated
Whether injunctive relief was granted, whether a final judgment has been entered, and how the 34 assessments map onto 29 statements.
Our read
The size is driven by counting each viewer as a violation. Expect that method to be the centre of the appeal.
Sources
- PPC Land: New Mexico judge fines Meta $25bn over Facebook privacy claims (opens in a new tab)
Source for the order, figures, quotes and conflicts between reports.