This article needs to beupdated. Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information.(September 2025)
Antitrust case alleging Google illegally dominates internet search
This article is about the antitrust suit targeting Google's search engine practices. For the separate suit targeting Google's advertising technology practices, seeUnited States v. Google LLC (2023). For other lawsuits, seeUnited States v. Google.
United States, State of Arkansas, State of Florida, State of Georgia, State of Indiana, Commonwealth of Kentucky, State of Louisiana, State of Mississippi, State of Missouri, State of Montana, State of South Carolina and State of Texas v. Google LLC
The case was heard starting in September 2023 in theDistrict Court for the District of Columbia with judgeAmit Mehta presiding.[3] Mehta ruled in August 2024, finding that Google held a monopoly on their search engine technology, and illegally used that position in securing Google's position with mobile device and website partners.[4][5] On the day of the ruling, Google president of global affairsKent Walker said in a written statement that the company intended to appeal the decision.[6][7]
The lawsuit was initially described as a "blockbuster antitrust trial",[8] and has been widely described as one of the most important federal antitrust lawsuit against a high-tech company since theUnited States v. Microsoft Corp. case in 1998.[9] Legal commentators anticipate that there will likely be an appeal, regardless of how the case is decided.[10] The outcome of the case is considered to have a potential bearing on the subsequently-filed federal antitrust suits against fellow "Big Tech" companiesMeta Platforms,Amazon, andApple.[11][12][13] The DOJ filed asecond antitrust lawsuit against Google over the company's advertising market practices in 2023.[14]
In September 2025, Mehta ruled that Google would not be required to divest ofChrome or Android, but would be barred from includingsearch in exclusive contracts and required to share some data with competitors.[15][16] This was celebrated by the DOJ but was also described as a win for Google.
The rapid growth of the U.S.tech industry in the 1990s led to concerns about potential for anti-competitive behavior in the sector.[17] This ultimately led to the federal governmentlaunching an antitrust suit against Microsoft, alleging that the company unfairly hindered competition.[9]
In 2008, scrutiny by the DOJ and theCanadian Competition Bureau scrutiny of an advertising deal between Google andYahoo! led the companies to abandon their agreement. According to the DOJ, the "agreement between these two companies accounting for 90 percent or more of each relevant market" would have likely harmed "competition in the markets for Internet search advertising and Internet search syndication".[19]
The DOJ lawsuit alleges thatGoogle Search holds an unlawful monopoly in the search engine market
In 2011, members of theFederal Trade Commission (FTC) voted to demand information from Google as part of an antitrust inquiry into the company's search engine practices. Following a nineteen-month investigation, FTC staff attorneys recommended that the agency bring forth an antitrust lawsuit against Google. However, the members of the commissioners ultimately declined this recommendation, and voted on January 3, 2013, to close the investigation.[20]
InUnited States v. Google LLC, the federal government alleges that Google has unfairly hindered competition in the search market through anti-competitive deals withApple as well as mobile carriers.[1] The government alleges that, as a result of these practices, Google has accumulated control of around 88% of the domesticsearch engine market.
In doing so, the government alleges, Google has additionally monopolized thesearch advertising market at the expense of competing services.[24] Per the government's estimation, Google has been able to accumulate control of over 70% of the search advertising market.[9] As a result of lack of competition, Google has been able to over-charge advertisers versus what they would pay in a competitive environment.[25]
Pre-trial proceedings and developments (2020–2023)
Owing to the accusation that Google engaged in anti-competitive conduct through exclusivity dealings with Apple, it was reported in February 2022 that the government was looking to depose "Apple's most senior executives".[26] On December 12, 2022, Google asked the court to toss out the case, arguing that it fairly achieved its dominant market share and that the DOJ's argument "relies on dubious antitrust arguments."[27]
As of 2023, Google is represented in the case by attorneys fromWilliams & Connolly,Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, andRopes & Gray.[28] On August 4, 2023, Judge Mehta ruled Google will not face allegations the search engine prioritized associated products over competitors in the trial, but will allow allegations over Google's use of anti-competitive contracts dealing with Search and Android to go to trial.[29]
In February 2023, the DOJ accused Google ofdestroying evidence relevant to the lawsuit, and requested that Google be formally sanctioned.[30][31] The DOJ alleged that Google employees used an internal chat service with "autodelete" settings prior to and during the course of the lawsuit.[32] According to the DOJ, theFederal Rules of Civil Procedure meant that Google should have ceased the use of auto-deletion of employee chat messages as early as May 2019 in anticipation of a federal lawsuit. Similar accusations were made in theEpic Games v. Google antitrust case.[33]
Following the confirmation ofJonathan Kanter as Assistant Attorney General for the DOJ Antitrust Division, Google questioned Kanter's impartiality in the case given his past work for rival companies.[34]
Constitutional scholarLaurence Tribe criticized Google's claims, arguing they have "little legal basis and strain common sense".[35] In May 2022, it was reported that Kanter would be barred from working on the case as the DOJ considers mandating his recusal.[36]
Google's demands that Kanter recuse himself was met with criticism from politicians from both major parties. SenatorElizabeth Warren (D-MA) accused Google of engaging in bullying tactics.[37] Kanter was ultimately cleared by the DOJ to participate in the department's scrutiny of Google in January 2023.[38]
The trial started on September 12, 2023, with Kenneth Dintzer as DOJ's lead attorney.[39][3] In its opening statements, the DOJ accused Google of unlawfully maintaining a monopoly in the search engine market as early as 2010.[40] Google has defended itself from these accusations, with the company arguing that the high quality of its search products allows it to maintain a dominant position in the market.[41]
During the trial, Mehta received criticism for closing courtroom access for certain testimonies in the case and for delaying the release of public documents pertaining to the case.[42][43] Media companies includingBloomberg News filed a motion to increase public trial access.[44] Following a week of deliberations between both parties, Mehta decided on September 27 that the DOJ would be permitted to publicly release documents shown in the trial.[45]
Much of the trial centered on Google's deal with Apple to have Google search as the default option on theSafari web browser.[46][47] Witnesses from Google,Verizon andSamsung testified about the impact of Google's annual payments of approximately $10 billion to maintain default status for Google search.[48] Following the culmination of the government's case in the week of October 19, 2023, Google began its defense in court on October 26.[49] The trial ended up concluding on November 16, 2023.[50]
Following the trial, Mehta announced that closing arguments in the suit would be held in May 2024, and indicated he was uncertain as to how he would end up ruling in the case.[51] Attorneys from both sides reconvened to make their arguments on May 3 and May 4, 2024.[52]
Reuters reported that legal analysts expect that there will likely be an appeal in the case, regardless of how it is decided.[10] The case's decision is considered to set precedent potentially impacting other federal antitrust suits against "Big Tech" companies likeMeta Platforms,Amazon, andApple.[11][12]
On August 5, 2024, Mehta ruled that Google acted illegally to maintain a monopoly in "general search services and general text advertising".[53][54][55] After a hearing in September 2024, Mehta gave regulators until December 2024 to propose any penalties unto Google, and is likely to rule on those by August 2025.[56]
The DOJ submitted their proposal on how to remedy Google's search monopoly on November 20, requesting that Judge Mehta should force the company to sell theirChrome web browser and either sell the Android operating system or ban making Google services mandatory onAndroid devices.[57][58] The government also requested Mehta to render Google unable to enter into agreements resulting in them automatically being the default search browser, as well as to share company data to rivals for a decade.[59][60] Google had until December 20, 2024, to file their proposal, before a two-week remedies trial starting April 21, 2025.[61]
A 15-day trial began on April 21, 2025 and was conducted to determine what remedy, if any, should be imposed in order to correct Google's monopoly.[59][62] Mehta allocated seven trial days each to the DOJ and Google each, with senior ChatGPT andGemini officials testifying.[63]
In a filing, the DOJ indicated that it would introduce about 400 exhibits over the course of the trial and call 19 witnesses, including multiple senior Google officials.[63] Google listed 20 witnesses, including its CEO Sundar Pichai, while describing the DOJ's proposal as "wildly overboard."[64]
In September 2025, Mehta ruled that Google would not be required to divest ofChrome or Android, but could no longer includesearch in exclusive contracts. Mehta also ruled that Google would be required to share certainsearch index data and user interaction data with competitors.[65] In delivering his ruling, Mehta declared “[U]nlike the typical case where the court’s job is to resolve a dispute based on historic facts, here the court is asked to gaze into a crystal ball and look to the future."[66]
The Department of Justice declared it a "significant win" in a press release,[67] whileBarron's described it as “almost a best-case scenario" for Google's parent company,Alphabet.[68] Writing forThe Verge, tech journalist Lauren Feiner said the remedies verdict signaled that the "antitrust fight against Big Tech may already be over."[69] Webbush stock analyst Dan Ives called it a "home run" for Google and "a green light for a bigger Gemini AI partnership between Apple and Google." Quartz described it as a "the business equivalent of a ceasefire."[70]
Mehta ordered Google and the Department of Justice to “meet and confer” and submit a revised final judgment by September 10 that aligns with his opinion.[71]
The day of the ruling, Google's stock went up 8 points.[72] Google CEOSundar Pichai thanked PresidentDonald Trump the day after the remedies trial concluded.[73]
The case has attracted public interest amid scrutiny of the four Big Tech companies.United States v. Google LLC has been compared to theUnited States v. Microsoft Corp. (2002), a noted antitrust case againstMicrosoft.[74]
Polling by advocacy groupDemand Progress in October 2020 found that respondents across party lines support the suit by a 48% to 36% margin, with 52% of Republicans and 49% of Democrats found to be in support.[77] A survey of tech workers at various firms conducted by workplace app Blind in October 2020 found that 57% of tech employees polled believe the suit has merit, though only 13% of Google workers said the same.[78]
Politico noted that the filing of the lawsuit received praise from both Democratic and Republican politicians.[79] SenatorElizabeth Warren (D-MA) praised the DOJ for bringing forth a "legitimate, long-time-coming suit against Google for engaging in anti-competitive, manipulative, and often illegal conduct".[80]
SenatorTed Cruz (R-TX) also praised the lawsuit, arguing that "Google abuses its power not just in the search market by using its monopoly power to make billions, but it also uses it to try tocensor the American People".[81] The suit received additional praise from Republican SenatorsMike Lee (R-UT) andJosh Hawley (R-MO).[79]
RepresentativeSteve Cohen (D-TN) criticized the timing of the case, which was filed just weeks before the2020 presidential election. On Twitter, Cohen questioned the DOJ's decision to launch the suit so close to the election:
"Why did the #Trump Administration wait until TWO WEEKS before the election to file a lawsuit over #Google's monopoly power? Call me cynical, but if #antitrust enforcement was a real priority at #DOJ, why did they wait until now?"
In response to questions regarding the timing of the case, Deputy Attorney GeneralJeffrey A. Rosen defended the DOJ's timeframe, stating that though "we might have even preferred to be quicker", the DOJ sought to "make sure that we've done the work that's necessary" prior to bringing the case.[79]
Eric Schmidt, formerly CEO of both Google and parent company Alphabet Inc., criticized the lawsuit, stating that "There's a difference betweendominance and excellence".[82] On Twitter, Google denied the DOJ's allegations, with the company stating that consumers use "Google because they choose to -- not because they're forced to or because they can't find alternatives."[83]
In December 2020, 38 states brought on a similar lawsuit against Google. Co-led by Colorado Attorney GeneralPhil Weiser, theState of Colorado et al. v. Google LLC[84] case reportedly "goes beyond the DOJ's" in its scope of accusations, according toCNBC.[85]
In July 2021, attorneys general from 36 states and theDistrict of Columbia (D.C.) launched an antitrust lawsuit alleging that Google has hindered competition in theapp market through itsGoogle Play store policies.[86] In September 2023, all fifty states as well as D.C. andPuerto Rico reportedly "reached an agreement in principle" to settle the case.[87]
In January 2023, the DOJ filed asecond antitrust suit against Google centered on alleged anti-competitive conduct in theadvertising technology (adtech) market.[88] A spokesperson for Google denied the allegations of the lawsuit and accused the DOJ of trying to "pick winners and losers in the highly competitive advertising technology sector.”[89] The trial began on September 9, 2024 and concluded on September 27, 2024.
In addition to both ongoing federal antitrust lawsuits against Google, it was reported in 2022 that the DOJ was in the process of investigating if Google has engaged in anti-competitive conduct through bundling itsGoogle Maps service with company software.[90] In 2023,Politico reported that the probe focuses on theGoogle Automotive Services (GAS) offering provided to automakers, which includes the Maps service, thePlay store, and Google's voice assistant. The probe also scrutinizes Google's control of location data through Google Maps.[91]
^abKerr, Dana (May 2, 2024)."U.S. v. Google: As landmark 'monopoly power' trial closes, here's what to look for".NPR.Archived from the original on August 6, 2024. RetrievedMay 3, 2024.The U.S. has also sued Amazon, Apple and Facebook parent Meta over business practices it says hurts both rivals and consumers. How the judge rules in this case could have far-reaching effects on how people use and interact with the internet.
^Perlman, Matthew (April 27, 2023)."Google Search Judge Needs More Info On Chat Sanctions Bid".Law360.Archived from the original on June 6, 2023. RetrievedJune 6, 2023.Google is represented by John E. Schmidtlein, Benjamin M. Greenblum and Colette T. Connor of Williams & Connolly LLP, Wendy Huang Waszmer, Susan A. Creighton and Franklin M. Rubinstein of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati PC and Mark S. Popofsky and Matthew McGinnis of Ropes & Gray LLP.
^Papscun, Dan (August 18, 2023)."Judge Deciding Google Antitrust Fate Criticized for Closed Court".Bloomberg Law.Archived from the original on May 3, 2024. RetrievedMay 3, 2024.Mehta has been criticized for how often he's closed his courtroom for certain testimony, and delaying a ruling on when trial exhibits could be made public. That's a departure from much of his prior practice. For example, in prosecutions of people involved in the Jan. 6 attack on the US Capitol, he regularly left the courtroom open.
^Kang, Cecilia; Isaac, Mike (December 9, 2020)."U.S. and States Say Facebook Illegally Crushed Competition".The New York Times.ISSN0362-4331.Archived from the original on May 29, 2022. RetrievedMay 29, 2022.The investigations already led to a lawsuit against Google, brought by the Justice Department two months ago, that accuses the search giant of illegally protecting a monopoly.
^Perlman, Matthew (December 17, 2020)."Google Hit With 3rd Monopolization Suit".Law360.Archived from the original on August 7, 2024. RetrievedMay 29, 2022.The case is State of Colorado et al. v. Google LLC, case number 1:20-cv-03715, in the U.S. District Court for District of Columbia.
