The tech giant argues that a forced divestment of Chrome or Android would be extreme, harming US consumers and jeopardising the country’s tech leadership
The DOJ has proposed that Google sells Chrome
On 20 November 2024, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) filed an official paperwork suggesting that Google sell off its Chrome web browser. This measure, among other proposed remedies, is aimed at tackling Google’s dominant position in the online search market. The filing follows a landmark ruling in August 2024 in which Judge Amit Mehta of the US District Court for the District of Columbia found that Google was an illegal monopolist in online search. The DOJ has now highlighted a number of ways in which Google has acted in a monopolistic manner, for example how it enters into contracts with other tech firms (e.g. Apple and Samsung) to ensure it is the default search engine on their devices. The DOJ considers that this could be anti-competitive by pushing more users into using Google over other search engines. Judge Mehta is set to issue a decision on the case by August 2025.
Google may also be required to divest Android and make search index data available to competitors
The DOJ has suggested a number of structural and behavioural remedies, including that Google:
Divests Chrome;
Divests its Android operating system or allows for court oversight of Android to ensure it is not used to favour Google’s search engine;
Does not enter into exclusionary agreements with third parties that ensure Google is made the default search engine on browsers and devices;
Is prohibited from utilising any of its other owned or operated assets (such as Gemini AI) to preference its search engine and from lessening the ability of a user to discover rival search engines;
Makes its search index data available at marginal cost to rivals and provides current and potential rivals with user and ad-side data for a period of 10 years at no cost; and
Is required to appoint an internal compliance officer and establish a technical committee to assist plaintiffs and the court in monitoring Google’s compliance to anti-monopolistic measures.
The DOJ hopes that these remedies would help address Google’s monopolistic power in the search engine market (where it accounts for around 90% of all online searches globally), thereby opening up the market up to competition.
Google has accused the DOJ of regulatory overreach that could harm the US and its citizens
Kent Walker (Chief Legal Officer, Google) responded to the DOJ’s proposal in a fiery blog post calling the DOJ’s filing “staggering” and complaining that it would harm consumers, developers and small businesses in the US, as well as the country’s global economic and tech leadership. Specifically, Walker claimed that the DOJ’s “wildly overboard” proposal would:
Endanger the security and privacy of millions of Americans and undermine the quality of products that people love by forcing the sale of Chrome and potentially Android;
Require disclosure of unknown foreign and domestic companies of not just Google’s innovations and results but more troublingly, Americans’ personal search queries;
Reduce Google’s investment in AI, which Walker described as “perhaps the most important innovation of our time”;
Harm innovative services like Mozilla Firefox whose businesses rely on charging Google for search placement;
Deliberately worsen people’s ability to access Google Search; and
Mandate government micromanagement of Google Search and other technologies by appointing a technical committee with “enormous” power over users’ online experiences.
Walker further suggested that the DOJ is pursuing a “radical interventionist agenda”. Google is expected to counter the DOJ’s proposal with its own proposed remedies by 20 December 2024.
The future of the DOJ’s case is unclear under the incoming administration led by President Trump
The DOJ’s case against Google was filed at the end of President Trump's first term in office. With President Trump set to be inaugurated for a second time in January 2025, it seems unlikely that his new administration would stop the progress of this case considering that they filed it. However, the future of this case still remains unclear, with President-elect Trump recently suggesting that the breakup of Google is not in the US’ national interest. Interestingly though, the Vice President-elect, JD Vance, came out earlier this year in support of a breakup of Google. Vance said that the company was “way too big” and “way too powerful”, arguing for the splitting of tech giants as a means of encouraging innovation. There is no certainty around how hard the new administration will push the ongoing case against Google, but early signs do indicate that it could continue in a similar fashion to now.
