Courts Dictating how much Power Powerful Technology Corporations can Attain
Creators: name: Lau, Wallace
Publisher: name: American University
Year: 2024

description: The United States Supreme Court refused on Wednesday, October 23rd, a South Carolina state agency’s bid to shield information from Google after South Carolina argued that Google holds an illegal monopoly over digital advertising. In the South Carolina Department of Parks and Tourism v. Google LLC, No. 23-1849, (2024) case, South Carolina and several other states claimed that they were immune from Google’s subpoenas and had the right to not comply with them. [1]. While many states claim that Google should not be able to obtain advertising-related records from states, the Richmond-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in June 2024 upheld a lower judge’s order that allowed Google to receive advertising records from the states [2]. However, technology companies were hit with a huge loss as the Texas Attorney General won a case against Google’s internet search monopoly and anticompetitive business practices [3]. The courts have expanded and limited big technology companies’ rights, but future cases might decide how much power big technology companies can hold.<br>Google successfully persuaded the U.S. Appeals Court for the Fourth Circuit on June 5th, 2024, that they are allowed to ask the states to send their digital advertising records. Circuit Judges G. Steven Agee, Stephaine Thacker, and William Rraxler Jr all claimed that since South Carolina’s tourism agency was an “arm of the state,” it has no independent immunity from the 11th Amendment. Attorney Walker Humphrey, arguing for South Carolina’s state agency, proposed that every action claimed by an attorney general may not be taken on behalf of the entire case, but Circuit Judge G. Steven Agee heavily disagreed and claimed that the state attorney general represents the state [2]. The courts have different views regarding how much power big technology corporations can have. Conversely, the state attorney general fully represents the state’s interests, such as the Texas Attorney General (AG) successful case against Google for monopoly in August 2024 [3].<br>Attorney General Paxton sued Google in 2020 with the Trump Administration’s U.S. Department of Justice and 11 other state attorneys for monopolizing the internet and text-based advertisements [3]. AG Ken Paxton won the lawsuit as the federal court ruled that Google violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act 15 U.S.C. §§ 1–7 (1890). Similarly, AG Ken Paxton secured a $1.4 billion settlement with Meta over unauthorized capture of personal biometric data from its users.<br>The courts have different views regarding how much power big technology corporations have over the states and people. While the recent Supreme Court decision to refuse South Carolina’s state agency may be a significant win for maintaining Google’s power over the states, it wouldn’t be a major shock if the Supreme Court, or any court, rules that Google has to face significant punishments for having a monopoly over other corporations and the people.<br><br><b>Sources:</b>Mike Scrcella, Google Wins early order in US Supreme Court Clash over state agency records, Reuters News, (October 23, 2024), https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/google-wins-early-order-us-supreme-court-clash-over-state-agency-records-2024-10-23/Mike Scrella, Google wins bid for state records in online ads antitrust case Reuters News, (June 5, 2024), https://www.reuters.com/legal/transactional/google-wins-bid-state-records-online-ads-antitrust-case-2024-06-05/Ken Paxton Attorney General of Texas, Attorney General Ken Paxton Delivers Major Win Against Google’s Internet Search Monopoly and Anticompetitive Business Practices, (August 6, 2024), https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/news/releases/attorney-general-ken-paxton-delivers-major-win-against-googles-internet-search-monopoly-and