The US government’s antitrust battle with Google has attracted worldwide scrutiny. Not since Microsoft stood trial in 1998 has Big Tech faced such a threat. One year after Judge Amit Mehta declared Google a monopolist, he presented remedies that some view as weak while others see as potentially effective.
Google’s core platforms remain untouched
During the remedies phase, speculation grew about a possible breakup. Judge Mehta dismissed demands to spin off Chrome, the world’s most popular browser. The Justice Department also asked for oversight of Android to prevent Google from strengthening its grip on search and advertising. Both products survived unscathed.
“These platforms built share, blocked competition, and monetized power,” said John Kwoka, economics professor at Northeastern University. Regulators may still seek tougher action later this month in a separate case focused on Google’s dominance in advertising technology.
Artificial intelligence reshapes the legal fight
The Justice Department launched its lawsuit in 2020, before generative AI became mainstream. “GenAI changed the course of this case,” Judge Mehta wrote, pointing to the surge of investment in the field. The pace of change has only accelerated since his ruling that Google monopolizes search.
Google plays a leading role in AI, often highlighting generated answers above traditional results. Yet Judge Mehta argued that AI challengers hold the resources and innovation to pose a real threat. He acknowledged the difficulty of predicting the future of such a rapidly shifting market. “That is not a judge’s strength,” said Jennifer Huddleston, senior fellow at the Cato Institute. His caution shaped the remedies he issued.
A partial win for Big Tech
Most Wall Street analysts described the decision as a victory for the technology sector. Still, Judge Mehta imposed measures that could help rivals. Google must share parts of its search index with “qualified competitors.” The index acts as a massive map of the internet. Some competitors may even republish Google’s results to gain time to innovate.
Google can continue paying Apple and Samsung for prime placement on devices and browsers. But exclusive deals are now banned, giving partners more freedom 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.
She noted that Judge Mehta faced constraints shaped by the Microsoft case, when an appeals court overturned a breakup order. “It was always going to be difficult for this judge to achieve what his colleague was blocked from doing more than twenty years ago,” Allensworth said.
