Federal judge passes on major breakup of Google internet search

WASHINGTON (CN) — A federal judge ruled Tuesday that Google can keep major parts of its multitrillion-dollar company, capping off a yearslong antitrust trial over its internet search monopoly.

U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, in a 230-page opinion, soundly rejected the Justice Department’s request to order the divestment of Google Chrome and Android to address Google’s dominance in the internet search market.

“Google will not be required to divest Chrome; nor will the court include a contingent divestiture of the Android operating system in the final judgment,” the Barack Obama appointee wrote. “Plaintiffs overreached in seeking forced divestiture of these key assets, which Google did not use to effect any illegal restraints.”

However, Google will be required to share its search index and user-interaction data with search engine competitors — which rivals have argued are necessary to match the quality Google has accomplished via its monopoly — as well as certain search and search text ad syndication services.

Further, Mehta barred Google from entering or maintaining exclusivity contracts that condition the Google Play Store with the preloading of another Google application, like search or Gemini. Additionally, the judge prevented the search giant from conditioning hefty payments on the placement of one app with another — like search for Gemini, conditioning payments on maintaining an application on devices for more than one year and prohibiting a partner from also distributing another search engine, browser or artificial intelligence product.

The decision marks a significant victory for Google, which pushed Mehta to issue a narrowly tailored remedy and reject the Justice Department’s wide-reaching remedy proposal.

Even smaller remedies, like the implementation of a choice screen for search engines when users first open a browser, were rejected. Mehta wrote that judicial precedence required him to “avoid remedies that compel product design requirements,” and suggested there is little evidence that choice screens are effective.

Mehta heard two weeks of witness testimony, with Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Apple Senior Vice President of Services Eddy Cue, Mozilla Chief Financial Officer Eric Muhlheim, OpenAI Head of Product Nick Turley and others taking the stand.

He concluded Google operated a monopoly last August after a nine-week liability phase in 2023, finding that the search giant had wrongfully shelled out billions to establish its search engine as the default on the Safari and Mozilla browsers.

Google also wrongfully tied its Chrome browser and Google Play Store into deals with device manufacturers like Android and Samsung for Google Search to further boost traffic and collect valuable user data, Mehta ruled.

Artificial intelligence became a key focus during the remedy phase— Google announced its AI Overview product in Google search in September 2024, a month after the liability phase ended. The Justice Department expressed concern that the technology could allow Google to circumvent most of its proposed remedies.

Under Mehta’s ruling, Google will not be required to modify policies to offer website publishers more say in how Google uses their content, a reference to the use of news articles in AI Overview.

In Tuesday’s decision, Mehta noted that the emergence of artificial intelligence following the close of the liability phase “changed the course of this case.”

“No witness at the liability trial testified that GenAI products posed a near-term threat to [general search engines,]” Mehta wrote. “The very first witness at the remedies hearing, by contrast, placed GenAI front and center as a nascent competitive threat. These remedies proceedings thus have been as much about promoting competition among GSEs as ensuring that Google’s dominance in search does not carry over into the GenAI space.”

The possibility that Mehta could order the divestment of Chrome — the largest internet browser with approximately 65% of all global internet users — invited several tech and AI executives to express interest in taking over Chrome. Yahoo Search General Manager Brian Provost, Perplexity Chief Business Officer Dmitry Shevelenko and Turley each testified their companies would attempt to purchase Chrome.

Google’s vice president of regulatory affairs, Lee-Anne Mulholland, has repeatedly vowed to appeal Mehta’s remedy ruling to the D.C. Circuit, setting up a second lengthy fight over the tech giant’s future.

The appellate court’s 2018 decision in United States v. Microsoft — the company’s last major antitrust case — has loomed large over the proceedings, as a major breakup of Microsoft for monopolizing the web browser ultimately floundered and resulted in a settlement.

In a blog post Tuesday, Mulholland reiterated Google’s disagreement with Mehta’s initial liability ruling and denounced Mehta’s remedy decision.

“Now the court has imposed limits on how we distribute Google services, and will require us to share search data with rivals,” Mulholland wrote. “We have concerns about how these requirements will impact our users and their privacy, and we’re reviewing the decision closely. The court did recognize that divesting Chrome and Android would have gone beyond the case’s focus on search distribution, and would have harmed consumers and our partners.”

Abigail Slater, assistant attorney general of the Justice Department’s antitrust division, welcomed Mehta’s decision as a victory that would “help restore competition in search and search advertising” in a statement.

“The first Trump administration sued Google to restore competition for millions of Americans subjected to Google’s monopoly abuses,” Slater said. “Today, the second Trump administration has won a remedy to do just that. We will continue to review the opinion to consider the Department’s option and next steps regarding seeking additional relief.

Follow @Ryan_Knappy