The US government’s antitrust case against Google has drawn global attention. Not since Microsoft faced trial in 1998 has Big Tech confronted such pressure. One year after Judge Amit Mehta declared Google a monopolist, he issued remedies that some critics call weak, while others argue they could still influence competition.
Chrome and Android remain untouched
During the remedies phase, many expected a breakup. Judge Mehta rejected calls to spin off Chrome, the world’s most popular browser. The Justice Department also requested oversight of Android to prevent Google from reinforcing its control over search and advertising. Both platforms survived intact.
“These platforms 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 battle
The Justice Department filed its lawsuit in 2020, before generative AI became widely known. “GenAI reshaped this case,” Judge Mehta wrote, highlighting the surge of investment in the sector. The pace of change has accelerated since he ruled Google monopolizes search.
Google plays a central role in AI, often placing generated answers above traditional results. Yet Judge Mehta said AI competitors now hold the resources and technology to challenge Google where older rivals could not. He acknowledged the difficulty of predicting a rapidly evolving 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 partial win for Big Tech
Wall Street analysts largely saw the ruling as a win for technology companies. Still, Judge Mehta imposed measures that could help competitors. Google must share portions of its search index with “qualified competitors.” The index acts as a vast map of the internet. Some rivals may even reuse Google’s results to gain time for innovation.
Google can continue paying Apple and Samsung for prime placement on devices and browsers. But exclusive contracts are banned, giving partners more freedom to explore alternatives. “The remedies could still carry weight,” said Rebecca Hay Allensworth, antitrust professor at Vanderbilt University. She stressed that avoiding a breakup does not equal a full victory for the tech sector.
She added that Judge Mehta worked under limits set by the Microsoft case, where a higher court blocked a breakup order. “It was always going to be difficult for this judge to achieve what his colleague failed to do more than twenty years ago,” Allensworth said.
