Amazon must face price gouging lawsuit, federal judge rules
Reuters//January 6, 2026//
A federal judge on Monday rejected Amazon.com’s bid to dismiss a proposed class-action lawsuit accusing the online retailer of price gouging during the COVID-19 pandemic.
U.S. District Judge Robert Lasnik in Seattle, Amazon’s hometown, found “unpersuasive” a claim that Washington state consumer protection laws were vague as applied to pricing, and did not cover the alleged price gouging.
Lasnik said it was plausible to infer that product shortages, public health directives and the shift to online purchasing left consumers “no meaningful choice but to purchase from Amazon despite the allegedly unfair prices it was charging.”
Consumers accused Amazon of failing to prevent sellers from using its platform to charge “flagrantly unlawful” prices for food and other staples.
They also said Amazon inflated prices on its own product inventory to “profiteer off consumers in desperate need.”
Prices rose 233% on Aleve pain relief tablets, 1,044% on Quilted Northern toilet paper, 1,523% on Arm & Hammer baking soda and 1,800% on some face masks, according to the complaint.
Amazon and its lawyers did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Steve Berman, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, called the decision “an important win for consumers.” He also said internal Amazon documents demonstrated that the retailer knew what price gouging was and assured state attorneys general it was trying to prevent it.
The lawsuit seeks damages for people who paid “unfair” prices for food and other consumer goods on Amazon between January 31, 2020 and October 20, 2022, around when Washington and other states ended COVID-related states of emergency.
Related Articles
Legal Tech
- Gemini Legal launches DraftEngine for civil litigation forms
- Lawyers continue to grapple with AI ethical issues
- Are AI prompts privileged? Time will tell
Latest Opinion Digests
- Insurance-Interpleader-Competing Claims to Insurance Proceeds
- Employer-Employee-Discrimination-Hostile Work Environment
- Criminal Law-Rape-Oral and Written Judgments
- Torts-Defamation-Official Immunity
- Real Property-Adverse Possession-Oral Agreement for Sale
- Domestic Relations-Termination of Parental Rights-Parental Unfitness
- Criminal Law-Violation of Order of Protection-Scope of Cross-Examination
Top stories
- Parity Act claim against insurer for child’s treatment survives motion to dismiss
- ABA opinion addresses client restrictions in engagement letters
- U.S. District Court allows plaintiffs to amend complaint alleging fraud
- AAA Insurance faces $21.5M bad faith verdict in Clay County
- Legal Limelight: Meghan S. Largent champions landowners in takings cases
- Supreme Court rejects bright-line rule on FAA worker exemption
- 2026 Unsung Legal Heroes: Publisher’s Letter, honorees
- Driver in accident settles negligence suit with other motorist





