Google will pay $1.375 billion to settle allegations it systematically violated Texans’ privacy rights, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced this week, marking one of the largest data privacy settlements ever secured by a single state.
The historic agreement resolves two major lawsuits against the tech giant, which Texas accused of secretly tracking users’ locations, collecting sensitive browsing data, and harvesting biometric information without proper consent — even when users believed they had opted out of such tracking.
A Record-Breaking Settlement
“This historic $1.375 billion price tag for Google’s misconduct sends a clear warning to all of Big Tech that I will take aggressive action against any company that misuses Texans’ data and violates their privacy,” Paxton said in a statement announcing the finalized agreement.
The settlement dwarfs previous privacy-related agreements with the tech giant. For perspective, a coalition of 40 states previously secured just $391 million from Google for similar claims — less than a third of what Texas alone will receive. The next largest single-state settlement with Google was a comparatively modest $93 million, according to information obtained by KVIA.
What exactly did Google do wrong? According to the Texas Attorney General’s office, the company engaged in a pattern of deceptive practices that undermined consumers’ ability to control their own data. The tech giant allegedly continued collecting precise location data even after users disabled location services, misled people about the privacy protections of Chrome’s “Incognito” mode, and captured biometric identifiers including facial geometry and voiceprints through products like Google Photos and Google Assistant.
“For years, Google secretly tracked people’s movements, private searches and even their voiceprints and facial geometry,” Paxton remarked in May when the settlement was first announced. “I fought back and won.”
Pattern of Privacy Violations
The case represents the culmination of litigation that began in 2022, when Texas filed lawsuits claiming Google violated both the state’s consumer protection laws and its Capture or Use of Biometric Identifier Act. Legal documents indicate that Google’s alleged violations were particularly troubling because they occurred across multiple products and services.
Perhaps most concerning to privacy advocates? The revelation that Google’s “Incognito” mode wasn’t nearly as private as users were led to believe. While many consumers assumed the browsing mode prevented data collection, Texas alleged that Google continued gathering user information even when this supposedly private browsing option was activated.
This isn’t the first time Paxton has targeted major tech companies over data privacy concerns. The settlement follows a similar $1.4 billion agreement with Meta earlier this year over illegal biometric data collection, as well as previous Google settlements of $700 million and $8 million for anticompetitive and deceptive practices.
Legal Collaboration
Norton Rose Fulbright served as outside counsel for Texas in the case, working alongside attorneys from the state’s Consumer Protection Division. In a statement, the law firm expressed pride in “representing the State of Texas in this important fight for Texans’ data privacy rights.”
The settlement arrives at a time of increased scrutiny of tech giants’ data collection practices nationwide. While Google has agreed to the financial terms, the resolution also requires the company to address the underlying privacy violations that led to the litigation.
For consumers concerned about their digital privacy, the case offers a stark reminder: even when you think you’ve opted out of tracking, your data may still be collected, analyzed, and monetized by tech platforms operating in the shadows of complex privacy settings and technical jargon.
As one of the largest privacy settlements in U.S. history comes to a close, the question remains whether this billion-dollar penalty will meaningfully change how Silicon Valley approaches user privacy — or if it will simply be written off as a cost of doing business in the data economy.
