Germany’s New Law Could Let Authorities Raid Google, Meta and X Offices — Even Without a Judge

The federal government is planning a new law that would allow searches of tech giants and journalistic newsrooms, as well as the seizure of materials—partly without a judicial warrant. The draft bill adopted by the cabinet on December 17 is being described by experts speaking to NIUS as an unconstitutional assault on fundamental rights and a targeted attack on freedom of expression.

If the law is passed by the federal government, it could have immediate consequences for the premises of U.S. tech companies in Germany. They would face the threat of searches and seizures of documents if they fail to transmit information exactly in line with EU rules. Germany is thus further expanding its censorship complex, while the United States under President Donald Trump has only just imposed an entry ban on the heads of the organization HateAid, thereby taking aim at a central actor in the German censorship complex.

At the heart of the matter is the so-called Political Advertising Transparency Act, or PWTG, originating from the office of Digital Minister Karsten Wildberger. With this law, the federal government intends to transpose an EU regulation into national law that governs how political advertising may be disseminated online.

A central role in the new legislation is assigned to the Federal Network Agency, which has already risen to the status of a censorship authority through the Digital Services Act (DSA) and is headed by Green Party politician Klaus Müller, the former environment minister of Schleswig-Holstein and a close confidant of former Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck (Greens). Under the planned law, the Federal Network Agency—alongside the Federal Commissioner for Data Protection—is to receive far-reaching powers that are otherwise primarily reserved for criminal law enforcement agencies.

Klaus Müller heads the Federal Network Agency.

The backdrop is the EU regulation TTPA (“Transparency and Targeting of Political Advertising”), which critics see as a new EU tool for censoring media outlets and political parties critical of the government. The regulation claims to promote greater transparency in political advertising, but in reality the rules are so convoluted and the data-protection requirements so extensive that major tech companies such as Meta and Google have decided to stop running political advertising altogether. The EU’s threat is severe: tech corporations could be forced to pay up to 6 percent of their annual revenue if the EU determines they have violated its rules.

This is a problem not only because political advertising is a vital part of democratic opinion-forming. The vague definition of “political advertising” also creates a chilling censorship effect, as major platforms filter content using keywords and repeatedly misclassify journalistic material as advertising—then block its promotion. NIUS, for example, is regularly denied the promotion of journalistic content on YouTube due to alleged election advertising, including videos such as “The EU Wants to Ban Germany from Building Gas Power Plants” or “Exposed: The Secret Salaries of ARD Executives.”

The EU’s TTPA therefore massively restricts free opinion-forming. The federal government is now going even further than the Brussels regulation with its own draft law.