The judge overseeing the landmark antitrust case against Google pressed Justice Department lawyers on whether potential search engine rivals will have room to grow amid the rise of artificial intelligence – a critical question as he considers the government’s push to break up its illegal monopoly.
US District Judge Amit Mehta — who labeled Google a “monopolist” in a separate trial that wrapped up last year — dug into the issue during closing arguments of the remedy phase in a Washington court on Friday.
“Do you think someone is going to come off the sidelines and build a new general search engine in light of what we are seeing?” Mehta asked, referring to the rise of AI-powered search tools offered by Google and others.
DOJ lawyer David Dahlquist described so-called generative AI as the “gateway to search,” while hammering home the agency’s argument that any court-ordered remedies must address new and future technology, not just Google’s past indiscretions.
“The reason we are so focused on Gen AI is because that is the new search access point,” Dahlquist said.
The DOJ has asked Mehta to force Google to sell off its Chrome web browser and ensure it cannot use its AI tools to further entrench its illegal monopoly over the industry – among other proposed fixes.
Mehta has said he will make a final decision by August.
Aside from a divestment of Chrome and AI-focused remedies, the DOJ has argued that Google should no longer be allowed to pay companies like Apple to ensure its search engine is set as the default option on most smartphones.
The feds also want to force Google to share search data with rivals. Their proposal also suggests requiring Google to sell off its Android operating system if initial remedies prove ineffective.
Google has pushed back, arguing the DOJ’s proposals go far beyond the judge’s initial ruling and would “break these platforms.”
The company has gone as far as to suggest that a forced breakup would jeopardize US national security and allow China to beat the US in the race to build advanced AI.
Google also argued that it faces fierce competition from other AI-powered platforms, such as those offered by Sam Altman’s OpenAI.
“DOJ’s case ignores how intense competition has transformed the industry. Well-funded services like ChatGPT, Grok, DeepSeek, Perplexity and MetaAI are rapidly gaining users and distribution, and adding innovations at a breakneck pace,” Google vice president of regulatory affairs Lee-Anne Mulholland said in a blog post.
During closing arguments, Google attorney John Schmidtlein said the company has already addressed AI-related search concerns by no longer pursuing exclusivity deals with wireless carriers and smartphone makers, including Samsung.
Earlier in the remedy trial, an OpenAI executive said that the company would be interested in acquiring Chrome if it were up for sale. The executive also acknowledged that OpenAI would benefit if it had access to Google search data.
