Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced that the State of Texas has reached a settlement of approximately $1.375 billion with Google LLC, resolving two lawsuits filed in 2022 that accused Google of unlawfully tracking Texans’ geolocation data, harvesting biometric identifiers (such as voiceprints and facial geometry) and misleading users about browsing privacy in Incognito Mode. The settlement is the largest ever achieved by a single U.S. state against Google in a data-privacy case, dwarfing previous multistate agreements and demonstrating a sharp escalation in state-level enforcement even without a comprehensive federal privacy law. Google stated the claims relate to outdated policies that the company has already changed, and the agreement does not require admission of wrongdoing.
Sources: Texas Attorney General’s Office, Reuters
Key Takeaways
– The $1.375 billion settlement marks a new high-water mark in state-level privacy enforcement against Big Tech and signals that states like Texas are willing to impose major financial consequences on companies for data-collection practices.
– The allegations against Google centered on tracking location data even when users disabled services, collecting biometric data without proper informed consent under Texas’ Capture or Use of Biometric Identifier Act, and misrepresenting the privacy protections of Incognito Mode.
– While the settlement is large, Google did not admit wrongdoing and the agreement does not mandate substantive changes to its products or services, raising questions about the real deterrence effect and whether meaningful behavioral change will result.
In Depth
In a decisive move combining regulatory ambition and financial muscle, the State of Texas under Attorney General Ken Paxton has secured a sweeping settlement of roughly $1.375 billion from Google, concluding two major lawsuits filed in 2022 that accused the search-giant of violating Texans’ data-privacy rights. The lawsuits hinged on three principal allegations: Google’s ongoing collection of precise geolocation data even after users believed they had opted out, the harvesting of biometric identifiers (such as voiceprints and facial geometry) via services like Google Photos and Nest Hub, and misleading users around the privacy offered by Chrome’s Incognito Mode. These claims rested in part on Texas’ Capture or Use of Biometric Identifier Act, a state law granting significant statutory damages per violation, and the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act.
The settlement, announced in May 2025, exceeds all prior single-state recoveries against Google, and far surpasses earlier multistate settlements where Google paid amounts in the low hundreds of millions. The magnitude underscores a broader trend of aggressive state-level enforcement filling what many view as a federal regulatory vacuum in the absence of comprehensive U.S. privacy legislation. With this settlement, Texas positions itself as a testing ground—for Big Tech accountability via state attorney-general power.
From Google’s perspective, the company stated that the claims resolved in the settlement were largely “old product policies” that have since been changed, and emphasized that the agreement does not involve an admission of liability or require substantial changes to its products. That caveat has raised concerns among some privacy advocates and conservative critics alike: while the financial penalty is formidable, The absence of mandated reforms may limit the long-term behavioral impact on Google’s data-collection practices.
For consumers, the case raises sobering questions about what “privacy” really means in the digital age when a company continues to gather location and biometric data despite opt-out signals. It also highlights that even in a conservative-leaning state like Texas—often seen as friendly to business—regulators are prepared to hold corporations accountable for perceived misuse of data. For businesses, the message is clear: state laws imposing steep damages per violation of biometric or location-privacy statutes can now lead to billion-dollar exposures. Companies operating in Texas or collecting data from Texans must therefore closely examine consent mechanisms, disclosures and opt-out pathways.
In the broader political context, this settlement aligns with a conservative regulatory posture that emphasizes protecting individual rights—here, the right to privacy—against corporate overreach, while stopping short of sweeping regulatory mandates or new governance frameworks. It signals a middle path: strong enforcement of existing statutes rather than imposing a fresh federal regime that many conservatives fear could become burdensome. It also may provide a model for other states—but inevitably raises questions about federal preemption or consistency across jurisdictions.
Ultimately, the Texas-Google settlement stands as a landmark moment. Whether it spurs genuine reform at Google, prompts similar actions elsewhere, or simply becomes a large cost of doing business for Big Tech remains to be seen. But for now, it firmly establishes: in Texas, even tech giants are not above the law.