In the heart of an antitrust skirmish, Alphabet’s Google is not backing down. The tech titan recently made a fervent plea to a U.S. appeals court, aiming to compel a South Carolina state agency to unveil its internal records. These documents, Google hopes, will serve as a bulwark against allegations of monopolistic control within the digital advertising sphere.
The battleground for this clash? The hallowed halls of the Richmond, Virginia-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Here, the pivotal question hangs in the balance: should South Carolina’s recreation and tourism agency be shielded from Google’s document demands?
A prior ruling favored Google’s stance, prompting the agency to take its appeal to higher ground. Yet, amidst the legal wrangling, both Google and the state agency maintained a stoic silence when probed for commentary.
This legal joust stems from a broader lawsuit initiated by Texas and nine other states back in 2020. Accusations flew, alleging Google’s undue dominance in the realm of display ads and its propensity for overcharging advertisers. In response, Google sought a trove of records from the South Carolina agency, eager to bolster its defense against these blistering claims.
Google’s hunger for these records isn’t arbitrary; it seeks to uncover the agency’s evaluations of its products vis-à-vis its competitors. A strategic move, no doubt, in the high-stakes game of antitrust litigation.
South Carolina, represented by its attorney general, finds itself an unexpected plaintiff in this legal drama. Yet, the state’s parks and recreation department stands apart, uninvolved in the fray. The crux of the matter revolves around whether a state agency can assert its own immunity against subpoenas.
Legal sparring ensued at the appeals court, with Attorney Walker Humphrey advocating for the state agency’s autonomy. His argument pivoted on the notion that not every legal action by an attorney general represents the entirety of the state. A nuanced stance, indeed.
In the opposing corner, Google’s lawyer, Jason LaFond, rebuffed this notion, emphasizing the interconnectedness of state agencies with the state itself. His stance found resonance with the court, but questions lingered over the delineation of agency immunity.
As the legal battle rages on, the underlying litigation simmers in a Plano, Texas federal court. Google vehemently denies the allegations, with its bid to dismiss the states’ lawsuit awaiting judgment. March 2025 looms large on the calendar, marking the scheduled commencement of the trial.
The saga continues, with the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals holding the key to this unfolding drama. In the arena of antitrust, where stakes are high and strategies abound, Google and South Carolina stand as formidable foes, each vying for supremacy in the quest for justice.
