DOJ still wants Google to part with its Chrome browser as part of antitrust case

Yahoo

12-03-2025

Google will have to part with its dominant Chrome browser if the U.S. Department of Justice has its way.
The divestiture of Google Chrome is among remedies sought by the Justice Department's antitrust division in a proposal filed Friday, signed by acting assistant attorney general Omeed Assefi, all part of a suit initiated in 2020.
The Justice Department has argued Google used the Chrome browser to establish a monopoly in online search and advertising. The tech giant also paid third parties to use Chrome as its default search engine, argued the Justice Department and more than 45 states, which brought the suit along with the agency.
"Google's conduct presents genuine danger to freedom in the marketplace and to robust competition in our economy," the plaintiffs said in the Friday filing.
This filing and a one filed by Google, also on Friday, precede an expected hearing next month with a ruling by U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta to come in August, Bloomberg has reported.
The judge has already declared "Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly," in an opinion filed in August 2024.
DOGE stimulus checks: What happened to them? How the idea originated and where things stand now
Google's distribution agreements – such as paying Apple and Samsung billions each year to make Chrome the default search engine on smartphones and tablets – have allowed it to gain monopoly power in search and general search text ads, Mehta wrote in his August 2024 opinion. Those payments have "anticompetitive effects," he wrote. "That conduct has allowed Google to earn monopoly profits."
Mehta noted that in 2021, Google paid a total of $26.3 billion to Apple, Samsung and other companies such as AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile to ensure Google's search engine as the default for consumers. "Google has unlawfully used the distribution agreements to thwart competition and maintain its monopoly in the market for general search services and in various online advertising markets," Mehta wrote.
"Google's dominance eventually attracted the attention of antitrust enforcers – the U.S. Department of Justice and nearly every state's Attorney General," Mehta wrote.
If forced to sell Google Chrome, the price tag could approach $20 billion, Bloomberg has reported. But it would be a major blow to the tech giant.
In its proposal, Google says it can comply with Mehta's decision without divesting Chrome and instead by changing its licensing agreements with companies such as Apple to remove exclusive conditions on Chrome, Google Search and other applications.
Lee-Anne Mulholland, vice president of regulatory affairs for Google and its parent company, Alphabet, characterized the Justice Department proposal in December as going "far beyond what the Court's decision is actually about – our agreements with partners to distribute search," she wrote in a blog post.
"But the bigger problem is that DOJ's proposal would harm American consumers and undermine America's global technology leadership at a critical juncture – such as by requiring us to share people's private search queries with foreign and domestic rivals, and restricting our ability to innovate and improve our products," she wrote.
The Justice Department did drop a recommendation that Google also divest its investments in artificial intelligence, opting to require Google notify officials before any future AI investments.
The antitrust suit began during President Donald Trump's first term, as part of his pledge to take on Big Tech. It was the biggest antitrust case against a tech giant since the Justice Department sued Microsoft nearly two decades ago. That case resulted in a settlement.
The case against Google continued during the Biden administration, but now the Trump-run Justice Department is carrying the case forward.
While Google is expected to appeal the judge's final decision, the Justice Department may not want to achieve every remedy included in its final proposal said. What it's given the court may be part of a 'maximalist opening position that they can then negotiate from," Paul Swanson, a litigation partner who focuses on technology and antitrust at Holland & Hart LLP in Denver, Colorado, told Wired.
'The one through-line here is that this administration wants to be perceived as being tough on tech, but also not slow the growth of America's tech industries,' he told Wired. 'So they may signal more action than what they ultimately want.'
Contributing: Jessica Guynn and Jonathan Limehouse.
Follow Mike Snider on Threads, Bluesky and X: mikegsnider & @mikegsnider.bsky.social & @mikesnider.
What's everyone talking about? Sign up for our trending newsletter to get the latest news of the day
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Google should divest Chrome browser in antitrust case, DOJ says