Google and the U.S. Justice Department face off in a pivotal courtroom clash that could force the tech giant to sell Chrome and upend the future of search.
 |
| The Justice Department seeks sweeping penalties against Google, including a Chrome divestiture, as AI alters the tech landscape and fuels competition. Image: CH |
Washington D.C., USA --- May 30, 2025:
Google returned to federal court on Friday in a historic legal battle that could redefine its future and the entire online search ecosystem. The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is pushing for sweeping antitrust penalties after U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled last year that Google’s search engine constitutes an illegal monopoly.
The stakes are monumental. DOJ attorneys argue that only a radical breakup—banning Google’s multi-billion-dollar default search engine contracts and ordering the sale of its Chrome browser—can restore competition in a market dominated by Google for more than a decade.
Google is pushing back forcefully, asserting that the DOJ’s remedies are both excessive and outdated in light of recent technological shifts. "We heard from well-funded competitors eager to piggyback on Google’s innovations," wrote Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s VP of regulatory affairs, in a recent blog post. "What we didn’t hear was how these extreme proposals would actually help consumers."
At the heart of the DOJ’s case is the claim that Chrome and default search deals with companies like Apple have allowed Google to entrench itself as the default gateway to the internet. DOJ lawyers argue that AI alone won’t dismantle that entrenched dominance. They’ve called on Judge Mehta to break up Chrome—one of Google’s crown jewels—and prohibit its lucrative placement deals for at least 10 years.
The DOJ’s argument is bolstered by testimony from executives at AI-driven companies like OpenAI and Perplexity, who expressed interest in acquiring Chrome if it is divested—seeing it as key to gaining competitive traction in an AI-dominated future.
Google’s defense rests on the rapidly evolving search landscape. With AI-driven tools transforming how people seek information, Google argues that market disruption is already underway. Products like AI Overviews and conversational search are upending traditional search, reducing the need for government intervention.
Yet industry voices remain divided. Apple, which earns over $20 billion annually for making Google its default search engine, opposes the DOJ’s proposal, arguing the revenue supports innovation and that users would likely stick with Google regardless of default settings. Apple also claims that the ban wouldn’t push it to create its own competing search product.
Legal scholars, former Federal Trade Commission officials, and app developer groups have also weighed in. Some warn that the proposed breakup and data-sharing mandates could compromise user privacy, chill investment, and disrupt the broader tech ecosystem.
Conversely, startup accelerator Y Combinator supports dramatic action, claiming Google has turned general search and advertising into a “kill zone” that deters venture investment and stifles innovation. “As things stand, Google has locked up the most critical distribution channels,” it told the court.
Judge Mehta is expected to deliberate throughout the summer and issue a final remedy decision before Labor Day. Google, which has vowed to appeal the monopoly ruling, can only do so after a remedy is ordered.
As AI continues to redefine how users interact with technology, the court’s decision could mark a turning point in digital history—reshaping not just Google, but the future of search and online competition globally.