Washington Court Holds Meta to Political Advertising Penalty
This week, a Washington court told Meta that it could not escape a $24 million penalty for intentionally violating the state’s Fair Campaign Practices Act, which requires platforms to retain and disclose certain records related to political advertisements. Specifically, the law requires platforms to maintain information about demographic targeting and total reach, so that members of the public can request records for a specific advertisement.
 
In their opening brief, Meta’s lawyers argued that these requirements are unconstitutional, as the Supreme Court has only recognized disclosure laws that impose burdens on political speakers—not platforms themselves. This claim was undermined by testimony from journalism professor Dr. Shannon McGreggor, who told the court how Meta’s algorithms gradually reshape audiences to maximize engagement. As she explained, a political advertiser “will never have the information about the actual targets of that ad campaign that was based on the…audience that was created by [Meta].” Meta even tells advertisers to “start broad,” so its systems can “observe outcomes” and “optimize.” Therefore, political speakers who run ads on Meta platforms don’t always know what kind of audience their ads are shown to. While the penalty may be trivial for a company that reported $134 billion in revenue for 2023, this decision shows how Washington’s legislation could serve as a model for future disclosure laws, or even pave the way for more robust transparency via Meta’s Ad Library.