Rhode Island just became the first state to sue Meta for profiting off scam ads — while attorneys general across the country still refuse to lift a finger about the platform's systematic censorship of conservative voices.

Attorney General Peter Neronha filed suit in Providence County Superior Court on October 22, alleging Meta unlawfully profited from billions of fraudulent advertisements on Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp even as it told users it was protecting them. The stakes for ordinary Americans are straightforward: according to internal Meta documents cited in the complaint, the platform serves roughly 15 billion high-risk scam ads to users every single day and projects that about 10% of its 2024 revenue — some $16 billion — comes from scams and banned goods.

That is a staggering number. And yet the same state enforcers who mobilize over fraudulent Alzheimer's cure ads have nothing to say when Meta deplatforms Americans for posting the wrong political opinion.

The Rhode Island complaint draws on Reuters reporting from last year on internal Meta documents. Those documents showed Meta calculated it was earning far more from high-risk scam ads than it expected to pay in fines. In other words, the fines are just the cost of doing business — a business model the speech cartel has perfected.

The suit also alleges Meta's AI advertising tools actively assisted scammers in creating and optimizing fraudulent marketing. Rather than blocking suspected fraudsters, Meta sometimes charged them extra as a penalty and let them keep running. "A banned advertiser can reappear in the time it takes to provide a new email address or phone number," the complaint states. Examples include an ad promising to reverse Alzheimer's disease in 45 days that ran in more than 2,000 versions, and ads impersonating a Bank of America executive to push stock-trading scams on WhatsApp.

"As alleged, Meta knowingly exposed vulnerable users to fraud and scams, and made enormous profits in doing so," Neronha said. "When companies, big or small, take advantage of Rhode Island consumers, this office will do everything within our authority to hold them to account."

Meta spokesperson Andy Stone called the lawsuit "unfounded" and said the AG "refused to engage with us on ways we protect Rhode Islanders from scams, and has instead hired an out-of-state private law firm to concoct a lawsuit." Stone noted Meta has removed more than 159 million scam ads and launched new anti-fraud tools in the past year.

Arkansas Online reported the suit follows a string of massive payouts by Meta: a New Mexico judge ordered the company to pay $25 billion over misleading consumers about data privacy, and Meta agreed in August to pay up to $18 billion to settle claims by nearly all U.S. states that it designed its platforms to addict children. Santa Clara County, California, filed a similar scams suit in May, and the Consumer Federation of America sued Meta over scam ads in April.

Billions in fines. Billions more in settlements. And the scam ads keep flowing. The censorship of lawful speech? That keeps flowing too — it just doesn't generate lawsuits from state attorneys general. The question isn't whether Meta should answer for fraud. It's why the same officials who suddenly care about consumer protection can't be bothered to defend Americans' right to speak freely on the platforms they use every day.