Rachel Ettlinger |

August 15, 2025

The US District Court for the Northern District of Texas granted a motion by defendants World Federation of Advertisers, Diageo PLC, WPP PLC, and GroupM Worldwide, Inc. to dismiss an antitrust suit on Wednesday that was filed by Rumble, Inc., a media company with ties to President Donald Trump.

Rumble had accused the defendants, all four advertisers, of conspiring to restrict advertising on its platform, which hosts Trump’s Truth Social network. Finding Rumble lacked personal jurisdiction, filed in an improper venue, and failed to state a claim, the court dismissed the case without prejudice and did not address the merits of the case.

“In sum, the Court agrees with Defendants that ‘[t]his case has nothing to do with Texas, much less the Northern District of Texas,'” US District Court Judge Jane Boyle wrote in her decision.

Rumble, an online video-sharing and internet-hosting platform, filed the antitrust lawsuit in early August. The lawsuit focused on the World Federation of Advertisers’ Global Alliance for Responsible Media, a voluntary cross-industry initiative focusing on digital safety, and its brand safety standards that “ensure that their advertising dollars do not inadvertently support illegal or harmful content that damages their brands.” The initiative discontinued shortly after Rumble’s lawsuit was filed.

Defendants of the lawsuit denied that any agreement to withhold advertisement on Rumble’s platform existed, countering that there were “perfectly good non-boycott reasons why Defendants and others have chosen not to advertise on Rumble,” according to the defendants’ filing in February.

They further accused Rumble of trying to force the advertisers to do business with them, “despite many competitive reasons not to do so,” and to “weaponize the antitrust laws to create that business relationship and force advertisers to speak on its platform.”

Rumble and Trump’s Trump Media & Technology Group have filed similar free speech, censorship and disinformation lawsuits against others. In February 2025, the two media companies sued Brazilian Federal Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes for issuing orders to suspend social media accounts for spreading misinformation, allegedly violating the US-based commentators’ right to free speech.