In line with its antitrust measures, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) has proposed sweeping remedies to dismantle Google’s dominance in internet search.
Among the proposals, the DOJ has called for the tech giant to divest Chrome, the world’s most widely used web browser, citing its role in consolidating Google’s monopoly.
The recommendations, detailed in a court filing on Wednesday, also seek to end Google’s agreements with companies such as Apple and Samsung, which make its search engine the default on their devices.
These contracts, the DOJ argues, have further entrenched Google’s near-total control of the online search market.
The remedies stem from District Judge Amit Mehta’s landmark August ruling, which found Google had unlawfully stifled competition. In their filing, DOJ lawyers and several US states contended that such measures are crucial to restoring fairness in the search and advertising markets.
“Restoring competition to the markets for general search and search text advertising as they exist today will require reactivating the competitive process that Google has long stifled,” the government lawyers asserted.
Google's rebuttal
Google has sharply criticised the proposals, describing them as excessive and detrimental to consumers and the nation’s technological edge.
Kent Walker, Google’s president of global affairs, said, “The DOJ’s wildly overbroad proposal goes miles beyond the Court’s decision. It would break a range of Google products — even beyond Search — that people love and find helpful in their everyday lives.”
The tech giant has until 20 December to present its own proposed remedies. Judge Mehta is expected to issue a ruling on the matter by mid-2025.
Monopoly claims
Google’s search engine accounts for approximately 90 per cent of global online searches.
Government lawyers argue that its ownership of Chrome and the Android operating system has enabled the company to direct users to its search engine, thereby fortifying its monopoly.
The DOJ’s proposals include prohibiting Google from re-entering the browser market for five years and introducing court oversight of Android to ensure it does not favour Google’s search services and advertising.
Political implications
The case against Google was originally filed during Donald Trump’s presidency. With President-elect Trump set to return to office in January, legal experts are debating whether his new administration might adopt a different stance on the issue.
“It would be odd for the second Trump administration to back off a lawsuit that they filed themselves,” remarked Rebecca Allensworth, an antitrust professor at Vanderbilt Law School.
However, she noted that even if federal support wanes, states involved in the lawsuit could pursue the case independently.
Potential market impact
Legal scholars have highlighted the transformative potential of the proposed remedies.
Professor Laura Phillips-Sawyer of the University of Georgia emphasised that Google’s dominance in search has stemmed largely from its contracts and access to user data.
“The user data that Google secured because of its dominance in search helped refine Google’s search algorithm and sell text ads,” Professor Phillips-Sawyer explained.
“But those contracts also make it impossible for any newcomer in search to secure a distribution channel, and without any real possibility of reaching consumers, no one will invest in such innovation,” she added.
Should Judge Mehta accept the DOJ’s proposals, the online search market could witness significant disruption, offering new entrants a rare opportunity to challenge Google’s hegemony.
Follow us
