On October 21, 2026, a New Mexico judge ordered Meta to pay the State a $25 billion civil penalty, reduced from a stated statutory calculation of $219,498,600,000. The judgment sets 15% annual interest and reserves injunctive relief for further briefing.
How the court calculated the penalty
The jury found 43,899,725 willful violations across two categories. Its findings concerned 26 representations about data control, third-party access, the App Developer Investigation, misinformation, hate speech and equal enforcement of Facebook’s standards.
| Judgment figure | Amount or count | What it covers |
| Total willful violations | 43,899,725 | 43,899,720 unfair-or-deceptive-practice violations and five unconscionable-practice violations |
| Count used in the statutory calculation | 43,899,720 | Unfair-or-deceptive-practice violations |
| Calculation stated by the court | 43,899,720 × $5,000 = $219,498,600,000 | The $5,000 multiplier applies to the 43,899,720 unfair-or-deceptive violations |
| Civil penalty ordered | $25 billion | The court reduced its stated calculation to this award |
The five unconscionable-practice findings are part of the total, but not part of the multiplication shown in the judgment. The $25 billion is the penalty the court ordered Meta to pay.
Who receives the penalty, and what relief did the judge order?
The judgment awards the penalty to the State of New Mexico, not directly to individual Facebook users. Reuters reported that New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez said state law directs the money to the state’s school system.
The order sets interest at 15% per year until the penalty is paid in full. It also reserves injunctive relief, which could require conduct changes, for further briefing. The judgment itself does not grant or deny an injunction.
What the ruling could mean for other cases
Meta chief legal officer C.J. Mahoney said the company was confident it would prevail on appeal, according to a report published October 27. That statement describes Meta’s position; it does not establish an appeal outcome.
In an analysis published October 27, Stanford platform-regulation director Daphne Keller and Colorado Law associate professor Blake Reid discussed how the ruling could affect litigation strategies if it survives appeal. They pointed to differences in state laws, evidence, settlement terms and litigation resources. The New Mexico judgment does not establish that other states or cases will produce the same result.
