Meta misled Facebook users about data privacy, misinformation and hate-speech policies, a New Mexico jury has found in litigation stemming from the Cambridge Analytica scandal.
Jurors in Santa Fe found that 26 of 29 statements challenged by the state were false or misleading and concluded that Facebook committed 43,899,725 violations of New Mexico’s Unfair Practices Act.
The verdict followed a two-week trial in a lawsuit brought by New Mexico’s Attorney General.
The case arose from revelations that Cambridge Analytica obtained personal information relating to as many as 87 million Facebook users through a third-party application.
New Mexico alleged that Facebook subsequently made misleading representations about how users’ Seyfarth Shaw Breach Exposes Client Documents | Lawyer Monthly was collected, shared and protected.
The jury found deceptive statements concerning users’ ability to control how their information was shared and representations about whether Facebook provided or sold personal information to outside parties.
Meta denies that it sells users’ information.
The jury also found that Facebook made willfully deceptive statements about its handling of misinformation and hate speech.
Those findings included representations that the company did not profit from misinformation or hate, removed harmful misinformation and did not allow hate speech on its platform.
Jurors also found misleading statements concerning the consistent application of Facebook’s Community Standards and whether certain users, including politicians, received exceptions.
A further group of findings concerned Facebook’s response to the Cambridge Analytica scandal.
The jury concluded that statements about investigating third-party applications, conducting forensic audits, banning developers who misused data and notifying affected users were deceptive under state TikTok Agrees $100m Alabama Teen Safety Settlement | Lawyer Monthly.
Meta argued during the trial that New Mexico had taken statements out of context and ignored other disclosures acknowledging limitations in the company’s privacy and content-moderation systems.
A Meta spokesperson said the company disagreed with the verdict and would continue defending itself.
Meta also argued that its platforms are forums for free expression and that it has First Amendment rights concerning how it manages content and communications with users.
The verdict does not yet determine how much Meta will have to pay.
Judge Francis Mathew will decide the civil penalties in a later phase of the proceedings. New Mexico law permits penalties of up to $5,000 for each willful violation.
Attorney General Raúl Torrez said the state intends to seek the maximum penalty supported by the findings.
New Mexico is also seeking injunctive relief.
Potential measures could include requiring Meta to correct previous statements and undergo an audit examining how Facebook manages user information.
The case therefore remains active despite the jury verdict.
For data-privacy and consumer-protection lawyers, the decision illustrates how technology companies can face liability not only for underlying data practices but also for public representations explaining how those practices operate.
Statements concerning user control, third-party access, content moderation and internal safeguards can themselves create legal exposure if a jury concludes they give consumers a materially misleading picture.
The verdict also demonstrates how the Cambridge Analytica controversy continues to generate legal consequences years after the original data-harvesting revelations.
New Mexico declined to participate in a broader settlement resolving similar Cambridge Analytica-related claims in other states, allowing its case to proceed to trial.
Mathew must now determine the financial consequences of the jury’s findings and decide what, if any, operational changes Meta will be required to make.