In a landmark antitrust decision, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta on September 2, 2025, ruled against forcing Google to divest its Chrome browser or Android operating system—remedies the Justice Department had proposed to curb the company’s dominance in online search New York Post
Key Requirements: No Exclusivity, More Transparency
Instead of a breakup, the judge ordered:
- A ban on exclusive search engine or app deals—meaning Google can no longer lock out competitors on devices or browsers
- Continued ability to pay partners, like Apple, for default placement—with payments not prohibited due to potential downstream harm
- Mandatory sharing of some search index and query data with rivals such as Bing and DuckDuckGo to foster competition
Why Google Escaped the Breakup
Judge Mehta deemed forced divestiture of Chrome or Android to be “excessive” and “highly risky,” finding no direct evidence that these assets were used for illegal restraints on competition. He also cited evolving AI-driven competition as a reason to prefer market-based remedies over structural interference
Market Reaction & Criticism
- Alphabet and Apple stocks surged—Google’s parent surged over 6–8%, while Apple rose around 3–4% in after-hours trading
- Critics slammed the ruling as weak:
- Nidhi Hegde from American Economic Liberties Project called it a “feckless remedy” that fails to challenge Google’s monopoly
- Tech advocates, including DuckDuckGo’s CEO and Senator Amy Klobuchar, argued the lack of structural changes leaves competition stifled The Verge.
Broader Implications Ahead
- The •Justice Department is considering an appeal, signaling that this antitrust battle isn’t over yet
- Google continues to face a separate trial later this year targeting its online advertising practices
