One of search giant Google’s top lawyers in its landmark lawsuit with the U.S. government is also a key adviser to the Kamala Harris campaign — and anti-tech watchdogs are calling the cozy relationship “outrageous,” The Post has learned.
In a doubleheader that turned heads across the Beltway, Google lawyer Karen Dunn presented an opening defense in Virginia federal court last Tuesday against the Biden-Harris Justice Department lawsuit targeting its digital advertising business — and then reportedly stormed out of the courtroom that same afternoon to assist Harris with final preparations to take on Trump in Philadelphia.
“If you were writing a TV movie, you couldn't have written a better script,” said Jeff Houser, executive director of the Revolving Door Project.
with Harris is receiving praise for her performance in the debate Dunn's influence in Democratic circles is at its peak against Trump. This could bode well for Google, which was already determined to have an illegal monopoly on online search in a separate federal trial.
“One can imagine that Harris’s standing in the world has increased further after this debate — which could be worrisome if she ever negotiates a potential settlement with the Justice Department under Harris,” Hauser said.
Dunn is the top litigator at white-shoe law firm Paul Weiss, whose chairman Brad Karp is leading a “Lawyers Committee for Kamala Harris” to raise cash for her White House bid. He is tasked with defending Google against the DOJ case that is seen as an existential threat to its business model.
Dunn's dynamics have drawn the attention of anti-monopoly experts, who fear that he and tech-friendly advisers in Harris's close circle will exert behind-the-scenes pressure for a “hands-on compromise” rather than breaking up Google's dominant monopoly, as they fear that tech-friendly advisers in Dunn and Harris's close circle will exert behind-the-scenes pressure for a “hands-on compromise” rather than breaking up Google's dominant monopoly. The Post reported,
While Dunn is a highly respected attorney with a long history of defending big tech clients such as Apple and Uber in major cases, some experts saw Google's selection of him to deliver its opening statement as a clear show of power to demonstrate its ties to the White House.
“This will be demoralizing for the Justice Department’s team of lawyers who have been working around the clock to get the adtech case against Google ready for trial on a ‘rocket docket’ timetable while the administration sits down for consultations with opposition counsel,” said Brendan Benedict, an antitrust litigator at Benedict Law Group who has faced off against the tech giant in court.
Warm relations could mean Dunn is shortlisted to replace him [antitrust chief Jonathan Kanter] “When Harris takes office, she will be appointed to the DOJ,” Benedict said. Dunn was reportedly considered for the position early in President Biden's term.
When contacted for comment, a representative for Paul Weiss cited recent quotes from legal experts who disputed the conflict of interest claims.
For example, Steven Lubet, emeritus professor of legal ethics at Northwestern University's law school, told the New York Times that “there is no conflict between preparing arguments and representing a client in a case against the government.”
Google declined to comment. The Harris campaign did not respond to a request for comment.
The uproar over Dunn’s role in the Harris campaign is just the latest example of the ethical quagmire surrounding the Google adtech case involving Paul Weiss.
Eden Buzzetti, president of the conservative group Bull Moose Project, called the New York law firm's tactics toward Cantor “a huge ethical red flag.”
“I’m surprised that the Harris campaign has already opened itself up to these kinds of questions,” Buzzetti said. “She’s literally even being coached by Google’s law firm on what to say. I can’t really put into words how worrying this is for us because we as an organization oppose the dominance and manipulation of this Big Tech market.”
Paul Weiss accused Kanter (who himself was a former lawyer at the firm) of being biased because he had previously represented Google rivals such as Yelp, the trade group News/Media Alliance, and The Post owner News Corp. Judge Leonie Brinkema dismissed Google's claims as a “misleading defense”.
Meanwhile, Yelp and the News/Media Alliance accused Paul Weiss of switching sides by agreeing to defend Google in the case and improperly taking advantage of knowledge gained while working with the company's critics. They asked the court to bar the firm from representing Google.
Brinkema also rejected the motion last October — though he did impose significant restrictions, such as ordering a lawyer for Paul Weiss to recuse himself from the case and barring Google from presenting evidence related to Yelp or the trade group.
A document filed in July said, News Corp. alleged that Paul Weiss had ignored the fact that The judge's restrictions and potentially attorney-client privilege were violated through the production of certain documents in the edtech case.
Top Republicans have begun criticizing Harris over her reliance on Dunn.
In a letter dated September 10 In a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, the GOP-led House Judiciary Committee demanded a briefing before Sept. 24 on how the DOJ is “working to address potential conflicts of interest and political bias” related to Dunn's participation in the Google trial.
Elsewhere, A top Trump campaign adviser criticized called Dunn's actions “outrageous” and argued that it showed Harris would “never stand up to Big Tech.”
In his opening statement, Dunn argued that the DOJ’s case — filed last January by Biden-Harris appointees — would bring devastating “unintended consequences” if it resulted in a forced end to Google’s control over the digital ad market.
“Yes, Karen Dunn arguing against 'government intervention' in a market in which the government alleges Google has a 91% sustainable market share, and then leaving Vice President Harris to prepare for her presidential debate is deeply troubling,” said Lee Hepner, chief counsel at the American Economic Liberties Project. written on x,
