Zuckerberg paid $25 million, Musk dropped $10 million — now Trump sets sights on Google's Sundar Pichai
Sundar Pichai
. With multi-million-dollar settlements from Meta and X, Trump's legal team appears to be targeting YouTube's parent company. The pressure is increasing, and a settlement could be next.
Why is Donald Trump going after Sundar Pichai now?
Donald Trump is reportedly in settlement talks with Google CEO Sundar Pichai over a lawsuit stemming from YouTube's suspension of Trump's account.
Following Donald Trump's victory last year, Google CEO Sundar Pichai made an effort to minimize the groveling among social media titans. Unlike Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, he did not appoint Dana White, the head of the Ultimate Fighting Championship and a personal buddy of the incoming president, to his board of directors or appear on podcasts endorsing the virtues of "masculine energy."
He also did not openly express his straight-man "love" for Trump or go to work in the White House. Unlike Shou Zi Chew, the CEO of TikTok, Pichai never sent out a notification to all app users, thanking Trump for his efforts.
Live Events
Instead, there was the obligatory $1 million Google payment to Trump's inaugural fund, a quick trip to Mar-a-Lago, and the stoic appearance as a background prop during the ceremony in the rotunda of the U.S. Capitol, as per a report by The Atlantic.
ALSO READ:
Home Depot hours 4th of July: Will stores be open what to know for 2025?
In 2021, Donald Trump filed a lawsuit against Zuckerberg, Pichai, and the former CEO of Twitter, which Musk later acquired and rebranded as X, for limiting his accounts following the attack on the US Capitol on January 6.
What's the lawsuit really about?
The president claimed that the businesses and CEOs had violated his First Amendment rights by unlawfully censoring him at the behest of American political officials. It was a sarcastic statement from a politician who frequently uses threats from the government to settle political disputes.
In their postelection courtships of Trump, Elon Musk contributed an additional $10 million after Zuckerberg settled his lawsuit with a $25 million payout, primarily to Trump's presidential library fund.
Briefs filed in a federal court in San Francisco shortly after Memorial Day that seem to have gone unnoticed by the public indicate that attorneys for President Trump and Pichai have started "productive discussions" regarding the next steps of the case against YouTube, "with additional discussions anticipated in the near future." The parties have requested that the judge provide them till September 2 to agree on a course of action, as quoted in a report by The Atlantic.
More than Trump's legal skills or the strength of his case, the fact that the negotiations are taking place at all speaks to his extraordinary use of presidential authority.
The entire scenario is confusing, as President Trump has demonstrated that he can effectively utilize his elected office's authority to pressure private firms into paying civil lawsuits, even when the lawsuits are based on claims that the companies violated the law by giving in to pressure from politicians like him.
Donald Trump has used his office to target political opponents' speech at law firms, universities, and uncooperative media outlets like the Associated Press, demonstrating the incoherence of his First Amendment stance.
At the same time, he has condemned the notion that the government should ever attempt to censor the speech of his political allies. He brushes off the discrepancy when it is brought out.
Will Google settle like Meta and X did?
Sundar Pichai might potentially receive a favorable verdict if he decides to take Trump to court. If Google wins the case, it might lose more money than it would if it gave up and donated eight figures to Trump's presidential library.
FAQs
Is Sundar Pichai, Google CEO, expected to reach an agreement with Trump?
Negotiations are currently underway, but no agreement has been reached. As with Zuckerberg and Musk, Pichai may face pressure to settle.
What was Donald Trump's original lawsuit against big tech?
Donald Trump sued several tech CEOs for allegedly censoring him after January 6, citing First Amendment violations.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
9 minutes ago
- Mint
Trump's ‘fiscal dominance' play
There is a potential spoiler to the growth dividend President Trump is counting on from the tax cuts that Congress just passed. Those tax cuts will be financed by unprecedented borrowing. Textbook economics predicts that borrowing will push interest rates higher, neutralizing the benefits of lower tax rates. Trump has an answer for that: break the link between budget deficits and rates. In recent weeks, he has intensified his demands that Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell cut rates, or step aside for someone who will. Trump has always been, as he puts it, a 'low interest rate person." But his latest demands add a critical new dimension—he wants lower rates to meet his fiscal priorities. A flood of new bonds to finance deficits would normally put upward pressure on long-term interest rates. Trump's Treasury is trying to short-circuit that mechanism, signaling that debt issuance will tilt toward shorter-term securities and Treasury bills. This is a gamble. If short-term rates jump, the cost quickly hits the budget. Trump, though, doesn't intend to let that happen. 'We're going to get somebody into the Fed who's going to be able to lower the rates," he said on Fox News. A central bank that shifts its priorities from employment and inflation to financing the government has succumbed to 'fiscal dominance." It is usually associated with emerging markets that have weak central banks, such as Argentina. The result is typically some combination of inflation, crisis and stagnation. Getting to that point, though, can take years. Meanwhile, fiscal dominance can be a powerful stimulant. While fiscal dominance isn't yet the status quo in the U.S., the mere possibility might be influencing markets. Lower interest rates, aided in part by the prospect of a change in Fed leadership, coupled with deficit-financed tax cuts, have helped the stock market romp to new records. Central banks have long been intertwined with government finance. The Bank of England was founded in 1694 to help the monarchy raise money. The Federal Reserve helped finance the U.S. government in World War I. At Treasury's request, it capped interest rates during and after World War II. In the 1960s, it avoided tightening monetary policy while Treasury was trying to sell bonds, a practice that helped fuel inflation. Since then, the Fed has avoided explicit coordination with fiscal policy. From 2008 to 2014, it did hold interest rates near zero and buy government bonds. This wasn't fiscal dominance, because the Fed was acting on its own assessment of inflation, then below its 2% target, not on the instructions of the president. Trump, unlike other presidents, expects the Fed chair to follow his priorities. Earlier this year, he flirted with firing Powell. He backed off after bond yields shot up and stocks sank. A few weeks later, the Supreme Court effectively said the president can't fire a Fed governor (including the chair) without cause. Trump then explored a different way to pressure the Fed: naming the next Fed chair, even though Powell's term runs through next May. The idea is that markets, being forward-looking, would pay more attention to this 'shadow chair"than Powell. And indeed potential successors are now openly making the case for lower rates. It isn't a given, of course, that Powell's successor will do Trump's bidding. Still, Trump is creative at finding ways to force institutions he doesn't directly control to do as he says. Just look at universities and law firms. Back in May, House Republicans unveiled their version of Trump's 'one big, beautiful bill." It would have pushed the deficit from $1.8 trillion last year, or 6.4% of gross domestic product, to $2.9 trillion in 2034, or 6.8% of GDP, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. The U.S. has never before run such large deficits for so long. As bidding at Treasury bond auctions turned sloppy and Moody's stripped the U.S. of its triple-A credit rating, 10-year Treasury note yields climbed to 4.55%. The bill that passed Thursday is even more profligate: Deficits rise to $3 trillion, or 7.1% of GDP, in a decade. And if temporary tax cuts in the bill are extended, as the 2017 tax cuts have been, the deficit climbs to $3.3 trillion, or 7.9%, CRFB projects. And yet yields closed Thursday at 4.35%. Yields have fallen for several reasons, including mild inflation and softer labor market data. But the prospect of a Trump-friendly successor to Powell seems to have played a part. Goldman Sachs economists recently concluded that the next Fed chair will be less worried about deficits than Powell and will thus lower rates further in the next few years. If governments could borrow as much as they wished and set interest rates by fiat, why don't more do it? Because there is no free lunch. If interest rates are persistently too low, something bad will happen, usually inflation. Trump's threats against the Fed have yet to shift investors' expectations of future inflation. Perhaps they believe that no matter what Trump wants, the Fed will remain true to its mission. Even if they don't believe that, it is expensive to fight the Fed. For all the mystique around 'bond market vigilantes," markets won't price in higher rates if the Fed is determined to keep them down. More important, inflation has many drivers besides fiscal and monetary policy. As I wrote three weeks ago, mild inflation and cracks in the labor market (assuaged somewhat by the June jobs report) have boosted the case for a rate cut. Just because Trump's call for lower rates is self-serving doesn't mean it is wrong. Still, history suggests that when a central bank over time follows a president's dictates rather than its own judgment, the economy pays a price. Though maybe not soon enough to matter to the president. Write to Greg Ip at
Time of India
13 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump underwater in every key swing state, and now he's slipping in Texas too
US President Donald Trump 's approval ratings are going down again. Apparently, the ratings plummeted even beyond swing states . As the Fourth of July comes and goes, a new poll shows he's now underwater in more than half the country. The president's stronghold, Texas, is starting to look shaky, too. Donald Trump's approval rating is low in 29 U.S. states. Polls show that many people are worried about the economy, tariffs, and immigration policies, which are all hurting his support across the country. What do the polls show? Civiqs' polling, which included 35,929 responses, indicates that while Trump's support rating is positive in some states, it is declining in others. Overall, net positive approval ratings are found in 21 of the 50 states that were studied, while net negative ratings are found in 29. ALSO READ: Mass layoffs in 2025: Microsoft, Meta, and more big names slash jobs — is yours next? Live Events His approval rating is below average in other states. In Maryland, his approval rating is -41, and in Hawaii, it is -47. Trump's approval rating has likewise stayed in the negative range on a national level. Trump had a net approval rating of -14 points, with 40 percent of respondents approving and 54 percent disapproving, according to a YouGov/Economist poll of 1,590 adults taken between June 20 and June 23, as per a report by Newsweek. This was a slight decrease from -13 last week. The margin of error for the survey was +/- 3.5 percent. In the meantime, a Tyson Group survey of 1,027 American adults conducted between June 25 and June 26 revealed that Trump's net approval rating was 6 points lower, with 45 percent of respondents approving and 51 percent disapproving. Where is Donald Trump still popular? Wyoming has the highest approval rating for Trump, with a net rating of +44 percent. With an approval rating of +36 in West Virginia, he is also well-liked there. What's driving his approval ratings down? Trump's first few months in office have seen a range in his popularity. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) is in charge of overseeing the cuts that have sparked demonstrations. Trump's immigration policies have been the subject of other rallies, and his tariffs and strikes on Iran have also drawn criticism. On the other hand, the Fourth of July, also known as Independence Day in the United States, honours the Declaration of Independence. Given that it is a day of celebration and patriotism, any decline in Trump's popularity during the festivities would be devastating, as per a report by Newsweek. Protests against the Trump administration have taken place nationwide over the weekend of Independence Day, including rallies and demonstrations. The impact of Trump's policies and national and international events is likely to cause fluctuations in his approval rating. How are experts interpreting the polls? Since April, Donald Trump's approval rating has remained consistent in the mid-40s, indicating a high level of support, according to Richard Johnson, a senior lecturer in U.S. politics and policy at Queen Mary University of London. The economy has had a major impact on Trump's approval ratings, especially since the imposition of tariffs, which has caused a decline in ratings and is anticipated to be the main factor determining his future, an expert weighed in. FAQs In how many states is Trump's approval rating negative? According to Civiqs polling, Trump is losing support in 29 of 50 states, including some key swing states and even Republican stronghold Texas. What is causing the greatest drop in Trump's popularity? Economic uncertainty, tariffs, and controversial immigration and foreign affairs policies are cited as major reasons for the drop in his public support.
Time of India
13 minutes ago
- Time of India
Minnesota schools rush toward levies as $6.8 billion in US funding remains frozen
Why Minnesota districts are rushing toward levies amid a $6.8 billion US funding freeze. (AI Image) Minnesota's public schools are bracing for a financial crisis after the Trump administration announced a freeze on nearly $6.8 billion in federal education funding. As districts across the state face immediate budget shortfalls, many are turning to local levies as a last-resort solution to fill the growing gap. According to the Minnesota Department of Education (MDE), the state stands to lose $74 million in federal K–12 funding. The withheld funds were previously approved by Congress and were expected to be distributed on July 1. However, the US Department of Education sent a brief notification—through a no-reply email—stating that grant awards for several programs are under review due to the change in administrations. Funding earmarked for critical programs now in limbo Most of the frozen funds were designated for essential educational programs, including support for English learners, teacher development, adult literacy, and summer learning. Without this money, schools are scrambling to identify other revenue sources, as reported by KARE 11. In response to the unexpected freeze, many districts are considering levies to stabilize their finances. Sources told KARE 11 that three times as many Minnesota districts as usual are now exploring this option. Among them is the state's largest district, Anoka-Hennepin, which is facing a $13 million budget shortfall and could lose $1.6 million due to the federal freeze. Parents and leaders push for urgent action In the Prior Lake-Savage Area Schools, parent advocate Dawn Lenio emphasized the urgency of placing a levy on the November ballot. 'I think it would be really important to get a levy on the ballot as soon as this November, especially with funding from the federal level potentially being at risk,' she told KARE 11. Lenio, who has two children in the district and previously led a failed levy campaign, criticized the current school board for not taking quicker action. 'Our current school board, it feels like they're more focused on policy than actually helping to do the work the district needs them to do to get our budget under control,' she said, as quoted by KARE 11. The district is now facing a $4 million deficit, and the superintendent has presented a detailed timeline for the board to consider a levy. But the window is tight: the board must decide by the end of the month. Districts voice concern over federal silence Anoka-Hennepin's newly appointed teacher union president, John Wolhaupter, told KARE 11 that while levies have been discussed, 'Right now that's not something that's been on the table.' He added that the core issue is the state's failure to meet its education funding responsibilities. In a written statement to KARE 11, Anoka-Hennepin Superintendent Cory McIntyre called the freeze 'an unfortunate situation' and said it would impact critical academic and behavioral support services. The US Department of Education has not responded to further requests for comment. Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
