Court imposes antitrust remedies on Google but stops short of divestiture

A federal judge ordered a series of remedies against Google after finding the company maintained monopolies in online search and search advertising through years of exclusionary contracts. The ruling stops short of forcing the company to divest Chrome or Android but imposes strict limits on its business practices.

The decision, issued on Tuesday by U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta in Washington, D.C., requires Google to end exclusive distribution agreements for products including Google Search, Chrome, Google Assistant, and the Gemini AI app.

The court also ordered Google to share portions of its search index and user-interaction data with competitors, offer syndication of search results and ads, and disclose material changes to its ad auctions.

Other requests from state and federal plaintiffs were rejected, including calls for a breakup of Chrome or Android, a ban on payments to partners for default placement, mandatory “choice screens” for consumers, and a publicly funded education campaign about search options.

The remedies will remain in place for six years, with oversight by a newly created Technical Committee. Most provisions take effect 60 days from the judgment, except the committee’s work, which begins immediately.

Judge Mehta wrote that the measures are intended to “deny Google the fruits of its exclusionary acts and promote competition” while avoiding remedies that could harm consumers or stifle innovation.

Mehta wrote that requiring divestitures or banning payments would have caused “substantial and, in some cases, crippling downstream harms” to Google’s partners and related markets.

The court noted that AI tools such as ChatGPT, Claude, and Google’s Gemini app have begun to compete for queries but have not replaced traditional search engines. Several of the remedies are designed to ensure Google’s dominance in search does not extend unchecked into AI.

The Justice Department and a coalition of states first sued Google in 2020, arguing the company illegally maintained dominance through multibillion-dollar deals that locked up default placement on browsers and mobile devices. Judge Mehta found Google liable in 2024.