Meta can rebrand all it wants, but a New Mexico jury just made clear that changing your name doesn’t erase your record. As reported by Engadget, the jury found Meta violated New Mexico’s Unfair Practices Act, ruling that the company misled state residents about how it handles their personal data and how it applies its own misinformation policies.
The trial stems from a 2021 lawsuit filed by New Mexico in direct response to the Cambridge Analytica scandal, where data harvested from Facebook profiles was used to micro-target political advertising during the 2016 U.S. election. The state’s case argued that Meta misrepresented what third-party apps could do with user data, kept privacy settings deliberately vague, and falsely claimed it enforced hate speech policies equally across its platforms. Meta’s own lawyers admitted the company had made mistakes on privacy and misinformation. But they denied that Meta sold user data or profited from hate speech. That distinction, apparently, wasn’t enough for the jury.
A judge still needs to determine the fine. Meta, for its part, issued the kind of statement you’d expect. A company spokesperson said they disagree with the verdict and will continue to defend themselves, invoking First Amendment rights and claiming the company gives users “control over their data.” That framing deserves scrutiny. Telling users they have control while simultaneously obscuring what third-party apps can access with that data is exactly the contradiction this lawsuit was about.
This verdict matters because it closes a legal escape hatch Meta thought it had already paid to shut. In a separate deal, Meta settled with 47 U.S. states over child safety concerns in an $18 billion agreement that included $459 million specifically tied to Cambridge Analytica claims. But New Mexico and Florida both declined to join that portion of the settlement, which is why this trial happened at all. New Mexico went its own way, and the jury sided against Meta.
The bigger picture here is about accountability gaps in tech. Cambridge Analytica involved data from roughly 50 million Facebook users, most of whom had no idea their information was being harvested. That happened in 2016. It’s now 2026, and courts are still sorting out the damage. Meta rebranded in 2021, partly to move past exactly this kind of association. But legal liability doesn’t rebrand.
For anyone tracking the state of corporate data practices, this case is a reminder that vague privacy settings and selectively enforced policies aren’t just PR problems. They can be jury problems too. And with the fine still undecided, the full cost of this particular chapter isn’t written yet.