A New Mexico jury found Meta Platforms misled residents about data privacy in the Cambridge Analytica case, adding to the company’s legal challenges.

A New Mexico federal jury has concluded that Meta Platforms Inc. misled consumers about how their personal data was used in the fallout from the Cambridge Analytica scandal.

Jury Findings and Legal Implications

The twelve‑member jury found that Meta’s statements to New Mexico residents regarding data privacy were deceptive, violating state consumer‑protection laws. The verdict adds to a series of legal challenges the company faces over its handling of user data.

Background of the Cambridge Analytica Case

In 2018, it emerged that political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica had harvested data from millions of Facebook users without consent, sparking global scrutiny of Meta’s data‑privacy practices. Subsequent investigations led to numerous lawsuits and regulatory actions.

Details of the New Mexico Lawsuit

The lawsuit, filed by the New Mexico Attorney General’s office, alleged that Meta’s privacy notices and marketing materials downplayed the risk that user data could be accessed by third parties. Plaintiffs argued that the company’s assurances of “robust privacy protections” were misleading.

During the trial, evidence presented included internal Meta communications that suggested the company was aware of potential data‑sharing risks but chose not to disclose them fully to consumers.

  • Misrepresentation of data‑privacy safeguards
  • Failure to disclose third‑party data access risks
  • Use of ambiguous language in privacy policies

Potential Consequences

While the jury’s verdict does not specify monetary damages, it paves the way for a separate sentencing phase that could result in fines, restitution to affected users, and mandated changes to Meta’s privacy disclosures.

Legal experts note that the ruling could influence other state‑level consumer‑protection actions, potentially prompting a wave of similar lawsuits across the United States.

“This verdict sends a clear message that companies cannot hide behind vague privacy statements when users’ personal information is at stake,” said a consumer‑rights attorney who observed the trial.

Meta has declined to comment on the specific findings, reiterating its commitment to user privacy and ongoing efforts to improve transparency.

Reuters coverage of Meta misled consumers case over Cambridge Analytica scandal