JUDGE REJECTS REQUEST TO BREAK UP GOOGLE IN LANDMARK ANTITRUST CASE, SHIFTING FOCUS TO BEHAVIORAL REMEDIES

A U.S. federal judge has rejected calls from regulators and rival companies to break up Google, dealing a significant blow to one of the most consequential antitrust cases of the modern tech era.

- 

While the decision spares Google from being forced to divest key businesses such as its ad tech operations or YouTube, the ruling still leaves the company exposed to a suite of potential restrictions that could reshape how it does business worldwide.

The outcome is a turning point not just for Google but for the global debate over how to regulate Big Tech, highlighting the difficulty of applying century-old antitrust frameworks to digital platforms that operate across advertising, search, mobile ecosystems, and cloud computing simultaneously.

THE CASE AGAINST GOOGLE

The lawsuit, filed by the Department of Justice in 2020 and joined by dozens of state attorneys general, accused Google of abusing its dominance in digital advertising and online search to illegally maintain monopoly power.

Prosecutors argued that Google:

Used exclusive contracts with device makers like Apple and Samsung to entrench its search engine as the default.

Leveraged its control of search ads and display ads to disadvantage publishers and advertisers.

Integrated its products so tightly that rivals could not compete without relying on Google's infrastructure.

The government's most aggressive proposal was to split Google into separate companies, forcing it to spin off its ad tech business or other units to restore competition. It was the boldest antitrust request since regulators sought to break up Microsoft in the late 1990s.

THE COURT'S DECISION

Judge [Name withheld in early reports], presiding over the case in U.S. District Court, agreed that Google wields outsized power but ruled that the plaintiffs had not met the heavy burden required to justify structural separation.