U.S. Court Sanctions Meta Over Evidence in Andrew Forrest Scam Ads Case
A U.S. federal judge has sanctioned Meta in Andrew Forrest’s lawsuit over scam advertisements that used the Australian billionaire’s image to promote fraudulent investment schemes.
The ruling found that Meta failed to preserve electronically stored information it should have kept once litigation was reasonably anticipated. ABC reported that the missing evidence included final versions of scam ads shown to victims and that the judge found the failure prejudiced Forrest.
The decision raises the stakes in a case that already has broader implications for Big Tech liability. Forrest argues that Meta’s advertising systems did more than passively host third-party content. His legal team says the company’s tools helped optimize and personalize fraudulent ads before distribution. ABC reported that Meta has countered that the offending messages were not its doing.
Subscribe free for daily political analysis they won’t broadcast. Join 110K+ readers →
That distinction matters because Meta has relied on Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a U.S. law that often protects platforms from liability for user-generated content. Reuters reported in 2024 that Judge P. Casey Pitts allowed Forrest to try to prove Meta’s ad systems were not merely neutral tools and may have contributed to the ads at issue.
The practical consequence is straightforward. Meta may face limits on how it can use missing evidence in its defense, and the jury may be allowed to treat certain missing information as unfavorable if the trial record supports that instruction. ABC reported that Forrest is also entitled to fees and costs tied to the sanctions ruling.
Forrest welcomed the decision and said Meta must not be allowed to outrun responsibility. The case now moves forward with the evidence fight reshaping the legal terrain.
Subscribe free for daily political analysis they won’t broadcast. Join 110K+ readers →