A jury in New Mexico has found Meta Platforms liable for deceiving Facebook users about the strength and scope of its privacy protections, delivering one of the most significant courtroom setbacks the company has faced over its data practices. The verdict, reached this week in state court, stems from a consumer-protection lawsuit brought by the New Mexico Attorney General’s office.
Jurors determined that Meta misrepresented how it collected, shared, and safeguarded user data on Facebook, concluding the company’s public statements about privacy controls did not match its actual practices. The case now moves toward a penalty phase, where a judge could impose civil fines and additional remedies under the state’s Unfair Practices Act.
What the Lawsuit Alleged
New Mexico’s case argued that Meta told users their information was protected by robust privacy settings while, behind the scenes, the company’s systems allowed broader data collection and sharing than it disclosed. Prosecutors presented internal communications and product documentation they said showed executives were aware of gaps between the company’s public privacy commitments and its engineering reality.
The lawsuit drew on years of scrutiny that intensified after the Cambridge Analytica scandal, when it emerged that a political consulting firm harvested data from tens of millions of Facebook users without their knowledge. New Mexico prosecutors argued that despite promises of reform following that episode, Meta continued practices that misled consumers about who could access their personal information and how it was used for advertising and platform features.
Jury’s Findings
According to court filings, the jury sided with the state on core claims that Meta engaged in unfair and deceptive trade practices. The panel did not fully credit every allegation brought by prosecutors, but the liability finding on the central privacy-deception claim is what carries the most weight for future proceedings.
“This verdict confirms what we have argued for years: users were told one thing about their privacy while a very different set of practices operated underneath,” a spokesperson for the New Mexico Attorney General’s office said following the ruling.
Meta has disputed the characterization of its practices and signaled it will challenge the outcome. A company spokesperson said Meta believes the jury’s conclusions do not reflect the substantial privacy investments and policy changes it has made in recent years, including expanded user controls and third-party audits of its data practices.
Why This Case Matters
State-level consumer protection suits like New Mexico’s have become an increasingly important avenue for holding large technology platforms accountable, particularly as federal privacy legislation in the United States has stalled for years. Unlike federal regulators, state attorneys general can pursue claims under their own consumer protection statutes, often with lower legal thresholds for proving deception.
- The verdict could embolden other states to pursue similar claims against Meta or other major platforms over data practices.
- It adds to a growing list of legal and regulatory pressures facing Meta, including ongoing antitrust scrutiny and content moderation disputes.
- A penalty phase will determine the financial and operational consequences, which could include mandated changes to how Meta discloses data practices to users.
Part of a Broader Pattern
This is not the first time Meta has faced a major courtroom defeat tied to its platform practices this year. Just weeks ago, the company suffered a separate trial loss connected to how it operates Instagram and Facebook Stories, a case that could reshape core features across both apps. Taken together, the rulings suggest courts and juries are increasingly willing to scrutinize the gap between Meta’s public commitments and its internal engineering decisions.
Consumer advocates say the New Mexico verdict adds momentum to calls for stronger federal privacy legislation, arguing that patchwork state lawsuits, while impactful, cannot fully substitute for comprehensive national rules governing how tech companies handle personal data.
What Happens Next
The case now proceeds to a penalty phase, where a judge will decide on specific fines and any required changes to Meta’s disclosure practices in New Mexico. Meta’s legal team is expected to file post-trial motions and has indicated it will appeal the liability finding, a process that could take months or longer to resolve.
For Facebook users, the immediate practical impact remains limited while the case works through the courts. But the verdict adds to a mounting body of legal findings suggesting that promises made to users about data privacy have not always matched the company’s internal practices, a theme likely to resurface as other states and regulators weigh their own actions against major technology platforms.
