The US government’s antitrust case against Google has drawn attention worldwide. Not since Microsoft faced trial in 1998 has Big Tech faced such pressure. One year after Judge Amit Mehta declared Google a monopolist, he announced remedies that some critics call weak, while others believe could still influence the market.
Chrome and Android remain untouched
During the remedies phase, many expected a dramatic breakup. Judge Mehta rejected demands to spin off Chrome, the world’s most popular browser. The Justice Department also sought oversight of Android to prevent Google from reinforcing its control over search and advertising. Both platforms survived intact.
“These products built market share, blocked rivals, and monetized dominance,” said John Kwoka, economics professor at Northeastern University. Regulators may try again later this month in a separate case targeting Google’s advertising technology empire.
AI reshapes the legal landscape
The Justice Department filed its lawsuit in 2020, before generative AI reached mainstream use. “GenAI changed the course of this case,” Judge Mehta wrote, noting the rapid influx of investment. The pace of change has only accelerated since he ruled that Google monopolizes search.
Google plays a central role in AI, often placing generated answers above traditional results. Yet Judge Mehta said AI competitors now possess the resources and technology to challenge Google where older rivals could not. He admitted the difficulty of forecasting a rapidly changing market. “That is not a judge’s strength,” said Jennifer Huddleston, senior fellow at the Cato Institute. His caution shaped the remedies he imposed.
A cautious outcome for Big Tech
Most Wall Street analysts viewed the ruling as a win for the tech industry. Still, Judge Mehta imposed measures that could benefit competitors. Google must share portions of its search index with “qualified competitors.” The index serves as a vast map of the internet. Some rivals may even republish Google’s results to gain time for innovation.
Google can continue paying Apple and Samsung for prominent search placement on devices and browsers. But exclusive deals are banned, giving partners more flexibility to explore alternatives. “The remedies could still prove meaningful,” said Rebecca Hay Allensworth, antitrust professor at Vanderbilt University. She stressed that avoiding breakup does not equal a complete win for the industry.
She noted that Judge Mehta operated within limits set by the Microsoft case, when a higher court blocked a breakup order. “It was always going to be difficult for this judge to achieve what his colleague was stopped from doing more than twenty years ago,” Allensworth said.
