California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a significant evidentiary update on April 20, 2026, in the state’s ongoing antitrust litigation against Amazon.com Inc. The new filings allege that Amazon exerted systemic pressure on major brands, specifically naming Levi Strauss & Co., to increase their retail prices on competing e-commerce platforms such as Walmart and Target. This move, according to the Attorney General’s office, was designed to ensure that Amazon maintained its price leadership without having to lower its own margins to match competitors.
The evidence submitted to the San Francisco County Superior Court includes internal communications and testimony suggesting that Amazon monitored prices across the internet using automated tracking software. When the software identified a lower price for a Levi Strauss product on a competitor’s site, Amazon allegedly notified the apparel manufacturer and demanded that the price be raised elsewhere. Failure to comply reportedly resulted in punitive measures, including the loss of the featured Buy Box on Amazon’s platform, which significantly reduces a product's visibility and sales potential for third-party and wholesale vendors alike.
Attorney General Bonta stated that these practices created an artificial price floor across the retail industry. By forcing Levi Strauss and other vendors to hike prices at Walmart and Target, Amazon effectively neutralized the competitive advantage of those platforms. The filing asserts that these actions violated California’s Cartwright Act and Unfair Competition Law. The state argues that these most-favored-nation style policies harmed consumers by depriving them of lower prices that would have naturally occurred in a competitive market environment.
Levi Strauss & Co. is cited as a primary example in the filing, with the Attorney General alleging that the denim manufacturer was forced to adjust its wholesale and retail strategies to avoid retaliation from Amazon. While Levi Strauss has not been named as a defendant in the suit, the evidence details how the company’s pricing decisions were influenced by Amazon’s market dominance. The filing also references similar pressure applied to other large-scale retailers and consumer electronics brands, though the specific names of several additional companies remain partially redacted in the public documents released today.
Amazon has consistently denied these allegations since the initial lawsuit was filed. The company maintains that its pricing policies are intended to provide customers with the lowest possible prices and that it has the right to choose which products it features prominently based on their value proposition. Amazon spokespeople have previously argued that the Attorney General’s case would force the company to feature higher-priced items, which would ultimately harm consumers. The April 20 filing marks a critical phase in the discovery process as the case moves toward trial. The Attorney General is seeking a court order to prohibit Amazon from engaging in these practices and is requesting civil penalties and restitution for California consumers.