Google Must Face Jury on State Ad-Tech Antitrust Claims (1)

Alphabet Inc.’s Google will have to appear before a jury in a case brought by a group of states over the tech giant’s role in the online display advertising market after a federal judge in Texas largely denied the company’s bid to force a bench trial.

A dozen states’ antitrust claims can move on to a jury trial, while 15 states can pursue deceptive trade practice claims before a jury, Judge Sean D. Jordan in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Texas said. The Wednesday ruling handed the latest setback to Google in cases alleging it engages in anticompetitive practices.

But the states lost their bid to bring federal antitrust claims against Google, and it will ultimately be up to the court, not a jury, to calculate any civil penalties that are awarded, Jordan ruled.

The group of 16 states and Puerto Rico, led by Texas, brought their suit against Google in 2020, alleging the company monopolized the advertising technology market and struck a deal with Meta Platforms Inc. to discourage competition.

Most states can proceed with a jury trial under the Seventh Amendment because they’re seeking civil penalties that are punitive in nature, Jordan ruled. He cited among other opinions the US Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision last June in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy finding that defendants in federal enforcement actions have the right to a jury trial when facing financial penalties.

Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Missouri, and Puerto Rico will be excluded from a jury trial on the antitrust claims because those states are seeking only injunctions or are otherwise restricted from pursuing civil penalties under their specific statutes, Jordan ruled.

The jury also won’t consider deceptive trade practices claims for South Dakota and Puerto Rico, according to the decision.

“We remain confident both a judge and jury will find that ad buyers and sellers have many choices and when they choose Google they do so because our ad tech is simple and effective,” a Google spokesperson said in a statement Thursday. “This highly competitive industry has helped small businesses grow and fueled economic growth across the country.”

Google attempted to quash the demand for a jury trial in the states’ case late last year after sidestepping a jury in a US Justice Department lawsuit over its dominance in the technology behind online advertising.

In the DOJ’s case, Google proactively paid the federal government $2.3 million to cover the alleged monetary damages, prompting a Virginia federal judge to deem a bench trial the appropriate format and ultimately rule in April that Google illegally monopolized ad-tech markets. The DOJ is asking the judge to to force Google to sell key parts of its advertising technology.

In the states’ case, Google had argued the claims weren’t rooted in common law and that state sovereigns don’t have the immediate right to a jury trial in antitrust cases seeking monetary relief, which Jordan largely rejected in his opinion. The judge in January denied Google’s bid to dismiss the suit entirely after the company failed to convince him that the states lacked standing to pursue their case.

Google is also awaiting a decision from a federal judge in Washington on whether to break up the tech giant in a separate case from the DOJ and group of states after he ruled last August that the company monopolized the online search market.

Google is represented by law firms including Freshfields US LLP in the states’ ad-tech case.

The case is Texas v. Google LLC, E.D. Tex., No. 4:20-cv-00957, 6/18/25.