Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) announced a multistate antitrust lawsuit against several major advertising agencies, alleging they coordinated unlawful media censorship that harmed publishers and violated free speech principles.
At the same time, Paxton said Texas and other states, alongside the Federal Trade Commission, secured a settlement with three major agencies that bars them from engaging in similar conduct moving forward.
The settlement involves Dentsu US, Inc., GroupM Worldwide LLC, and Publicis, Inc.
According to Paxton's office, the case centers on claims that major corporations and advocacy networks worked with advertisers to cut off funding to outlets or platforms that hosted viewpoints labeled as misinformation or politically disfavored. Officials say those efforts disproportionately impacted conservative voices and reduced advertising revenue for certain publishers.
Among those cited as allegedly affected were Glenn Beck, Charlie Kirk, Steve Bannon, Fox News, and the platform X.
Under the settlement, the three agencies agreed not to make or enforce agreements that restrict business with media publishers based on political and ideological or commentary content. They also agreed not to use exclusion lists tied to viewpoints or DEI commitments, according to Paxton's office.
The agreement includes outside monitoring and compliance oversight ordered by the court.
"Freedom of speech is foundational to American liberty," Paxton said in a statement. "A coordinated group of woke, powerful individuals attempted to suppress that Constitutional right by manipulating ad agencies into sabotaging the reach, revenue, and credibility of conservative voices."
He added that Texas would continue efforts against what he called viewpoint suppression and market manipulation.
The lawsuit could become a major test of how antitrust law applies to digital advertising markets, content moderation, pressure campaigns, and coordinated corporate behavior.
Paxton's latest legal battle blends antitrust enforcement with the national debate over online censorship, setting up a closely watched fight over whether coordinated advertising decisions crossed the line into unlawful viewpoint discrimination.
