The media breathlessly reports allegations in complaints as fact all the time. Stacey Abrams' case against Brian Kemp over the 2016 election was voluntarily dismissed without the court ever reaching the merits. The media reported on the complaint, and an early ruling granting Abrams discovery, but of course never reported the quiet voluntary dismissal when nothing turned up.

Do you believe Google staff (or their outsourced contractors) can and should pre-judge the outcomes of US court cases?

Editing to make this a bit clearer:

As a matter of principle, do you believe Google staff (or their outsourced contractors) can and should pre-judge the outcomes of US court cases? I ask about principles because it's very easy to focus on the specific details of these particular cases, and the fact it's your political enemy pursuing them. But that may not be true next time, and certainly won't be true every time.

It's not pre-judging when case after case has been dismissed and/or laughed out of the courtroom.

It is literally pre-judging. You are deciding the outcome of a case that has not occurred, based on cases that have.

I've replied in more detail to your other comment which said much the same thing.