New Mexico Turns Old Facebook Promises Into 43 Million Hits

A Santa Fe jury on September 25, 2026 found Facebook liable for 43,899,720 violations of New Mexico’s Unfair Practices Act, a total built by spreading 26 public statements across the state’s residents and Facebook users. First Judicial District Judge Francis Mathew has not set a dollar figure. The statute caps each willful hit at $5,000, which would be $219.5 billion if he used the maximum, and Attorney General Raúl Torrez said that money would flow into a special fund for New Mexico schools, not into user accounts.

The case, State of New Mexico v. Facebook, Inc., No. D-101-CV-2021-00132, is the first state-led Cambridge Analytica trial to reach a jury, the New Mexico Department of Justice said. Users do not file claims. The live fight is how a judge prices a count that treats each old quote as a statewide event.

How 26 Quotes Became 43,899,720 Violations

Jurors spent two weeks on 29 statements from Mark Zuckerberg, former chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg, and other company voices, then sided with the state on 26 of 29. Randi McGinn, a lawyer for the state, told reporters some counts on the sheet had been combined, which is why the public score is 26 statements rather than a longer list of separate questions. The state played video depositions of Zuckerberg and Sandberg during the trial, which closed with arguments on September 23, 2026 before Dane Butswinkas, counsel for Meta.

The huge number is not 43 million separate posts. Figures on the redacted jury verdict form applied about 2.1 million people, roughly New Mexico’s 2020 population, to 11 statements that ran in major outlets, and 1,386,648 people, an estimate of Facebook users in the state in 2020, to 15 statements issued through company channels. That is 11 times 2,100,000, or 23,100,000, plus 15 times 1,386,648, or 20,799,720, which adds to 43,899,720.

HOW THE JURY MULTIPLIED EACH STATEMENT

In the state’s verdict announcement, the department said those statements were willful unfair or deceptive trade practices, and that the company also committed unconscionable trade practices by exploiting New Mexicans’ lack of knowledge to a grossly unfair degree. The findings covered user control of data, third-party access, hate speech and misinformation, even application of Community Standards, and the company’s promises after Cambridge Analytica.

Civil Penalties Feed a School Fund

Torrez spoke in Albuquerque after the verdict and tied the result to every large technology firm that sells into the state. The civil penalty, if Mathew imposes one, does not open a claims portal and does not change Facebook settings. New Mexico residents do not need to file anything. The department has not announced individual payments because the Unfair Practices Act channel used here recovers money for the state.

For years, Facebook operated as if the rules that apply to everyone else didn’t apply to them. Today, a jury of New Mexicans said otherwise.

Raúl Torrez, New Mexico attorney general, September 25, 2026 news conference

Today the #NMDOJ secured another historic jury trial verdict with over 43 million violations of #NewMexico’s Unfair Practices Act against Facebook… pic.twitter.com/D3Jh4o97P1

— New Mexico Department of Justice (@NewMexicoDOJ) September 25, 2026

Torrez also said the funds automatically benefit a special fund for the educational needs of New Mexico schools and students. McGinn put the same point in plainer terms, telling reporters the jury had answered 16 years of claims that user data was safe. The people counted in the 43,899,720 figure are the multiplier, not a class of payees. That is the second effect sitting behind the headline: a consumer-protection statute used as a statewide invoice, with classrooms as the named beneficiary.

The state is also asking Mathew for injunctions that would force changes to data practices and corrections of past statements, plus an audit of how Facebook handles user information. Those orders, like the dollar figure, remain unwritten.

The $459 Million Deal New Mexico Refused

Former Attorney General Hector Balderas filed the complaint on January 21, 2021, three years after Cambridge Analytica’s harvest became public, and he did it without joining a multi-state coalition. The complaint said the firm had reached about 70 million U.S. users, including about 350,000 New Mexicans. Later trial coverage used the wider figure of 87 million profiles. Those are two different counts from two different stages of the same scandal, and the Santa Fe jury was not asked to re-try the harvest itself. It was asked whether Facebook’s later words about data, speech, and the investigation were false.

Other states took cash instead of a verdict. In August 2026 Meta resolved child-safety claims with 47 states, Washington, D.C., and U.S. territories, and that package included $459 million for states that had sued over Cambridge Analytica privacy violations. New Mexico was not in that deal, so this case went to a jury. The go-it-alone filing from 2021 is what made that opt-out possible.

CAMBRIDGE ANALYTICA BILLS ALREADY CLOSED ELSEWHERE

• Federal privacy order: Facebook paid a record $5 billion privacy penalty on July 24, 2019 to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that it broke a 2012 order on user control of personal information.
• Multistate Cambridge slice: States that stayed in the August 2026 package took $459 million to end their Cambridge Analytica privacy suits, a door New Mexico left shut.
• The firm itself: Cambridge Analytica collapsed after the 2018 revelations and is not a defendant in Santa Fe; the New Mexico docket names Facebook, Inc., now Meta Platforms.

Balderas’s complaint is still the spine of the file Torrez tried. The jury’s work was to test public statements from 2010 through 2021 against the Unfair Practices Act, not to reopen the Federal Trade Commission order or the national settlement other states signed.

$5,000 a Hit Is the Ceiling

Section 57-12-11 of the Unfair Practices Act says that if a court finds a person has willfully used a method declared unlawful, the attorney general may recover, on behalf of the state, a civil penalty of not exceeding $5,000 per violation. The maximum is not automatic. The statute leaves the amount to the court, and the department’s own release said the figure is left entirely to the judge’s discretion.

Torrez told reporters his team would try to secure the maximum. At $5,000, 43,899,720 hits would be $219,498,600,000, which is $219.5 billion. Meta’s second-quarter 2026 results put quarterly revenue at $60.80 billion and cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities at $90.26 billion as of June 30, 2026. A full-cap award would dwarf both lines. That comparison is why the ceiling reads as a bargaining marker more than a probable wire: the law allows it, and the youth case in the same courthouse already used the $5,000 cap, but this count is 585 times larger than that 75,000-hit verdict (43,899,720 divided by 75,000 is 585.3).

A Meta spokesperson said the company disagrees with the verdict and will keep defending itself “against efforts to distort our record,” adding that its platforms are forums for free expression and that it has a First Amendment right to manage them, which it described as prioritizing free speech, protecting users’ information, and giving users control over their data. State lawyers have said an appeal would put any check years away. The unpaid bill is still a theory until Mathew writes a number and the appeals run out.

Santa Fe Already Extracted $942 Million in 2026

This was the third Santa Fe courtroom clash with Meta in a matter of months, and the earlier one already tested the $5,000 cap. In March 2026 a different jury found 75,000 Unfair Practices Act violations over young users’ safety on Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp and imposed the maximum, which is $375 million. In August 2026 Judge Bryan Biedscheid added $567 million for an abatement fund aimed at youth mental health and ordered five years of court-supervised changes to the apps in New Mexico, rejecting a Section 230 defense. Combined, that file stands at $942 million.

THE YOUTH CASE, SEPARATE FROM THIS VERDICT

• Civil penalty: 75,000 willful hits at $5,000 each produced $375 million in March 2026.
• Abatement fund: $567 million ordered in August 2026, most of it described as treatment money.
• Structural terms: Five years of age checks, overnight notification cuts for users under 18, mandatory time limits, hidden like counts, and twice-yearly public compliance reports.
• Still live: Meta has asked Biedscheid to amend those orders, so even this $942 million is not a cleared check.

The Cambridge Analytica jury did not set a dollar figure, which is the procedural split from the youth case. Mathew, not the panel, will price each of the 43,899,720 hits. The youth verdict matters here because it showed a Santa Fe jury and a Santa Fe judge were willing to use the Unfair Practices Act at the statutory cap against the same company, on a much smaller count, only months before this form came back.

Three Facebook Claims the Jury Rejected

The state’s win was wide, not complete. Jurors found the state had not proved unfair or deceptive practices on three statements, a reminder that the 26 of 29 score includes a real loss column. Those three sit next to the five subject areas where the panel did find willful deception, including promises to investigate apps, run forensic audits, ban developers who misused data, and notify people after Cambridge Analytica.

THE STATEMENTS THAT DID NOT LAND

• Graphic harm and fake cures: Claims about removing graphic violence or fake COVID treatments.
• Fact-checking: Claims about fact-checking as a way to handle misinformation.
• Terror and hate crimes: Claims about taking down posts that promote hate crimes or acts of terrorism after the 2017 Charlottesville attack.

The department still recites a long list of statements the jury did brand willfully deceptive: that users controlled how their information was shared, that Facebook did not sell or give personal information to advertisers, that it did not buy or sell user data, that it did not profit from misinformation or hate, that it had no extra protections for particular groups, and that it made no exceptions for politicians or newsworthiness. The rejected three are the only brake on that list, and they did not shrink the 43,899,720 total because the form only multiplied the statements the jury found false.

Judge Mathew Still Has to Price Each Violation

Liability is in. The invoice is not. The department said Mathew will schedule further proceedings before any ruling on civil penalties or injunctions. Until that order, the $219.5 billion figure is a cap on a petition, not an amount due.

THE SANTA FE CAMBRIDGE FILE

1. January 21, 2021: Balderas files D-101-CV-2021-00132 in the First Judicial District, sitting out the multi-state track.
2. March 2026: A separate Santa Fe jury returns 75,000 Unfair Practices Act hits on youth safety and imposes $375 million.
3. August 2026: Biedscheid adds $567 million and five years of product orders, taking that case to $942 million; Meta then settles Cambridge claims with other states for $459 million while New Mexico stays out.
4. September 8 to 23, 2026: Testimony and closings before Mathew on the 29 statements.
5. September 25, 2026: The jury returns 26 of 29 statements as willful violations totaling 43,899,720 hits; the penalty phase remains open.

WHAT WE KNOW

• Liability: Facebook was found to have willfully violated the Unfair Practices Act through 26 of 29 challenged statements.
• The count: The form total used at trial is 43,899,720 violations.
• Who is paid: Civil penalties under this statute go to the state, with Torrez pointing to a school fund; there is no user claims process.

WHAT IS UNCONFIRMED

• The dollar figure: Mathew has not set an amount per violation.
• Injunctions: Requests for audits, corrections, and practice changes have not been ruled on.
• Appeals: Meta has not filed an appeal of this verdict, and state lawyers have already said any payment would be years away if it does.

The closed chapter of Cambridge Analytica is not closed in Santa Fe. A jury has turned old statements into a per-head count, the attorney general wants the statutory cap, and the people whose data started the story are not on the check. Mathew still has to write the price of each of those 43,899,720 hits.