X asks Fifth Circuit to revive advertiser boycott lawsuit
X wants an appeals court to restore its case against 10 advertisers after settling with the trade group that created GARM.
By James Whitfield · Staff Writer
3 min read
X has asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to revive its x advertiser boycott lawsuit against 10 companies, after a Texas federal judge dismissed the antitrust case in March. The new filing matters because X’s settlement with the advertising trade group initially named in the suit did not end its effort to continue the case against the remaining advertisers.
According to Ars Technica, X agreed to dismiss the World Federation of Advertisers, or WFA, following a settlement. It is asking the Fifth Circuit to reverse U.S. District Judge Jane Boyle’s ruling as it applies to Mars, CVS Health, Nestlé, Abbott Laboratories, Colgate-Palmolive, Lego, Pinterest, Tyson Foods, Shell and Ørsted A/S.
Why did X’s advertiser boycott lawsuit get dismissed?
Boyle, who sits in the Northern District of Texas, concluded that X had not alleged a legally recognized antitrust injury. Her March decision said the company’s claimed harm amounted to customers choosing rival social-media platforms over X, and that losses resulting from competition do not by themselves establish an antitrust violation, Ars Technica reported.
The judge therefore dismissed the case even though X had alleged a group boycott. MediaPost reported that Boyle’s 56-page decision found that the allegations would not show an antitrust violation even if they were proved.
X is challenging that conclusion. In its Fifth Circuit filing, the company argued that the advertisers coordinated their decisions, eliminating the independent choices that would otherwise require each advertiser to assess the value of buying ads on the platform. X alleges the arrangement cost it economic business and distorted competition in social-media advertising.
What role did GARM play in the case?
The lawsuit, filed in 2024, centers on the Global Alliance for Responsible Media, known as GARM. The initiative was created by the WFA to help advertisers set brand-safety standards, including guidance related to violent and obscene material, according to Ars Technica.
X contends that GARM provided a mechanism for advertisers to coordinate a withdrawal of advertising from the platform. The company’s claim remains an allegation; the district court rejected its legal theory at the pleading stage.
GARM shut down in August 2024 after X brought the lawsuit. The WFA has said its brand-safety standards were voluntary and that members could decide whether to use them, MediaPost reported.
X began its appeal of Boyle’s decision in April and hired former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement as lead counsel in May, according to MediaPost. The current filing asks the Fifth Circuit to allow the lawsuit to proceed against the advertisers that remain after the WFA settlement.
This story draws on original reporting from Ars Technica.