Google’s protracted battle with the U.S. Department of Justice over its search market dominance entered a pivotal phase today as the remedies trial commenced in a Washington D.C. federal court. Following last year’s ruling that Google illegally maintained its monopoly in online search, the DOJ is now arguing for substantial changes, including the potential forced sale of the Chrome browser, to foster competition.
Opening statements painted contrasting pictures, with DOJ lawyer Kenneth Dintzer asserting Google built its monopoly through exclusionary contracts, while Google’s counsel John Schmidtlein countered that the government’s proposals would degrade user experience and harm partners.
The proceedings, overseen by U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta, arrive just days after Google suffered another antitrust setback. On April 17th, a separate federal court in Virginia determined the company illegally monopolized key parts of the online advertising technology market.
This compounded the initial liability finding in the search case from August 2024, where Judge Mehta determined Google used restrictive agreements – specifically citing payments like $20 billion annually to Apple and totaling $26.3 billion overall in 2021 – to be the default search engine, unfairly cementing its 90%-plus market share against competitors like Microsoft’s Bing, which holds around 6%.
DOJ Seeks Structural Fixes, Including Chrome Sale
The Justice Department’s central argument in this remedy phase is that Google’s interconnected ecosystem requires structural intervention. The DOJ contends that Google’s control over Chrome, the world’s most popular browser accounting for over two-thirds of the market, is intrinsically linked to its search monopoly.
In court filings from March 2025, the DOJ formally proposed divesting Chrome as a primary remedy, also seeking to prevent Google from neglecting Chrome’s functionality during any potential appeal or sale process.
Beyond selling Chrome, prosecutors want to permanently ban Google from making deals that set its search engine as the exclusive default. They also propose compelling Google to provide rivals access to certain data.
Expected witnesses supporting the DOJ’s case include DuckDuckGo CEO Gabriel Weinberg and executives from Yahoo (Brian Provost), Microsoft Bing (Michael Schechter), and OpenAI (Nick Turley), alongside Google’s own AI lead, Sissie Hsiao. Selling the Android operating system remains a possibility, though the DOJ’s latest stance positions this as a contingent remedy if other measures fail.
Google Counters with User Harm and Security Claims
Google vehemently opposes the DOJ’s proposals, labeling them extreme and unsupported by the court’s prior findings. Google’s lead lawyer argued today that forcing a Chrome sale would be unprecedented and harm users.
In a pre-hearing brief, the company asserted the DOJ’s “[…] result-oriented purpose is to force consumers, browser developers and sellers of Android mobile devices to use rival search engines — even though rivals are demonstrably inferior to Google and consumers overwhelmingly prefer Google,”
Google’s President of Global Affairs, Kent Walker, stated back in November 2024 that the proposals would “endanger the security and privacy of millions of Americans, and undermine the quality of products people love, by forcing the sale of Chrome and potentially Android”.
He more recently told Fox News Digital the plan could hurt “American consumers, our economy, our tech leadership, even national security.” A Google spokesperson previously described the DOJ’s measures as proposals that “continue to go miles beyond the Court’s decision,” emphasizing the company’s consistent stance.
Instead of divestiture, Google has suggested alternative remedies like allowing default deals on a year-to-year basis and permitting partners to feature rival search engines more easily. The company claims ending its revenue-sharing deals could hurt partners like Mozilla and increase phone costs. Google’s witness list features high-profile names including CEO Sundar Pichai and Apple’s Eddy Cue.
Trial Outlook and Regulatory Landscape
The remedies trial is scheduled to run until May 9, with Judge Mehta aiming to issue a ruling by August 2025. Google is expected to appeal any unfavorable decision. This case unfolds amidst intense global regulatory action targeting Google’s business practices, including European calls to potentially break up its ad tech business and a probe by Chinese authorities. The company also lost a significant case brought by Epic Games over its Android app store policies in late 2024. The outcome of the current remedies trial could substantially influence how antitrust laws are applied to major tech platforms worldwide.
