Meta Reaches $25M Settlement with Trump Over Social Media Ban

Meta has reached a $25 million settlement in response to a lawsuit filed by former President Donald Trump, following the company’s decision to suspend his accounts after the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot.

The move coincides with efforts by Meta and its CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, to improve relations with the Trump administration, aligning with other major tech firms.

According to the Wall Street Journal, three individuals who spoke on the condition of anonymity, the settlement designates $22 million for the nonprofit that will oversee Trump’s future presidential library. At the same time, the remainder will cover legal fees and related expenses.

The lawsuit’s resolution was reportedly influenced by a meeting between Trump and Zuckerberg at Trump’s private Florida club in November. During the gathering— part of a broader wave of corporate and government figures visiting Palm Beach — Trump raised the topic of the litigation, leading to two months of negotiations that ultimately resulted in the settlement, the sources said.

Meta has also taken additional steps to strengthen ties with Trump’s administration. The company contributed $1 million to Trump’s inaugural committee, and Zuckerberg was among several billionaires given prominent seating at Trump’s recent swearing-in ceremony, alongside Google’s Sundar Pichai, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, and X owner Elon Musk. Additionally, Meta announced before the inauguration that it would discontinue fact-checking on its platform, a move that aligns with longstanding demands from Trump and his allies.

Trump initiated the lawsuit after leaving office, condemning the actions of social media giants as “illegal, shameful censorship of the American people.”

The lawsuit, filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida, argued that Meta’s actions violated his First Amendment rights and amounted to unconstitutional censorship. Trump claimed that social media giants like Meta were not acting independently but were under pressure from Democratic lawmakers and government officials, effectively making their content moderation decisions a form of state action.

At the heart of the lawsuit was Trump’s argument that Meta, along with Twitter and YouTube, had too much control over public discourse. He accused these companies of stifling free speech and argued that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects platforms from liability for user-generated content and their moderation decisions, was being used unfairly to suppress conservative voices. The lawsuit demanded that Meta restore Trump’s Facebook and Instagram accounts and sought class-action status, inviting other users who felt wrongfully censored by the platform to join the legal battle.

Meta initially defended its decision, maintaining that Trump’s ban was a direct result of violations of its platform policies.