Other LanguagesIn recent years, Big Tech has been the focus of vigorous antitrust enforcement. Our office, along with many of our state and federal counterparts, is committed to protecting consumers from anticompetitive conduct in the Tech Industry, and investigates and litigates them both alone and with other antitrust enforcers.
Our office is currently litigating three lawsuits against Google.
First, in late 2020, Washington along with a coalition of 38 states filed a lawsuit against Google alleging the company illegally maintains its monopoly power over general search engines and related general search advertising markets. After a nine-week bench trial that began in September 2023, a federal judge ruled in August 2024 that Google is a monopolist. Litigation over remedies followed the liability trial, culminating with a three-week bench trial in the spring of 2025. In early September 2025, the federal judge issued its opinion summarizing the remedies it has ordered for Google's illegal maintenance of monopoly power. In 2026, Google appealed the judge's liability decision and all parties have appealed portions of the judge's remedies decision. Google has filed a motion to stay parts of the judge’s opinion pending the appeal, and the state and federal enforcers have opposed that stay.
Second, in 2021, Washington and 38 other state enforcers filed a second lawsuit against Google alleging that Google is excluding competition for mobile app distribution and in-app-payment services. The states reached a settlement in that case requiring Google to pay a total of $700 million and make changes to those services for which they have sought approval from the federal judge assigned to the matter. The court approved the settlement in May, 2026.
Third, in 2022, Washington joined the DOJ and 16 other states in lawsuit alleging Google maintains an unlawful monopoly of online display advertising (“ad tech”). After a fifteen-day bench trial in September 2024, a federal judge ruled that Google unlawfully monopolized and tied the digital adverting markets for publishes and ad exchanges. A remedies trial before the federal judge is set to begin in September 2025. Google has appealed the judge's liability decision and all parties have appealed portions of the judge's remedies decision. Google has filed a motion to stay parts of the judge’s opinion pending the appeal, and the state and federal enforcers have opposed that stay.
You can learn more about these Google cases here, here, and here.
Our office also independently investigated, filed and resolved a lawsuit against Amazon, which shut down the Sold by Amazon third-party seller price-fixing program nationwide in early 2022. You can learn more about the basis for the lawsuit here.
More recently, in 2024, our office joined the U.S. Department of Justice and a bipartisan group of 20 attorneys general in 2024 in an antitrust lawsuit against Apple for monopolizing the smartphone market and by restricting how developers and business can use the iPhone, stifling innovation and keeping prices artificially high. In June 2025, a New Jersey federal judge denied Apple's motion to dismiss this lawsuit. Litigation is ongoing. You can learn more about this case here.
In 2025, our office began litigating against three additional technology companies.
First, in April 2025, our office filed suit in King County Superior Court against RealPage, Inc., a pricing software provider, and nine Washington landlords—Greystar, Pinnacle, LivCor, UDR, Prime Administration, Sares Regis, MG Properties, LaSalle, and Quarterra. The complaint alleges a conspiracy among the landlords, organized by RealPage to use algorithmic pricing software to raise, stabilize rental property prices and reduce occupancy; a conspiracy to align pricing strategy; an information exchange conspiracy; and unfair methods of competition in sharing a pricing algorithm all of which violate the Washington Consumer Protection Act. Washington filed oppositions to four motions to dismiss and presented oral argument opposing them in January 2026, all of which were denied in February 2026. Washington is now obtaining documents, information, and testimonial discovery to support its case with admissible evidence at trial, which is scheduled to begin in October 2027.
Second, our office and twelve other attorneys' general intervened in a U.S. Department of Justice lawsuit challenging Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co.'s $14 billion purchase of Wi-Fi rival Juniper Networks as a violation of antitrust law and seeking to stop it. The intervenor coalition acted after public reporting surfaced that raised substance and process questions concerning a proposed settlement the parties filed with a federal court in late June 2025, which allowed the deal to proceed shortly before trial was scheduled to begin. After intervening, Washington and others in the intervenor coalition obtained documents, information, and testimony bearing on the process that produced the proposed settlement and the adequacy of its terms. The intervenor coalition then summarized this evidence in federal court filings and presented oral argument opposing entry of final judgment on March 23, 2026. Washington awaits the federal court's ruling on whether or not entering final judgment on the proposed settlement is in the public interest under the Tunney Act, 15 U.S.C. § 16.
Finally, Washington and a bipartisan group of four other states filed a federal lawsuit in October 2025 alleging that Zillow and Redfin violated antitrust laws when they struck a deal earlier in the year that eliminates online rental ad competition between them and cements Zillow's dominance in this product market across the United States. This lawsuit was subsequently consolidated with a parallel lawsuit filed by the Federal Trade Commission. The lawsuit alleges that Seattle-based Zillow agreed to pay Redfin $100 million in exchange for Redfin exiting the internet listing service business for multifamily properties with 25 units or more. Redfin, also based in Seattle, agreed to transition property management clients to Zillow, and that agreement required Redfin to financially incentivize its sales representatives to shift clients to Zillow. Shortly after the agreement, Redfin allegedly moved quickly to dismantle its multifamily rental internet listing service business, firing about 450 employees. Zillow and Redfin filed a motion to dismiss that was denied in May, 2026, after briefing and oral argument. The case is ongoing with trial set for August 24, 2026.
For more information about our cases, please visit our cases page.
As a helpful resource, the Antitrust Division has prepared a presentation about Antitrust and the Tech Industry.