United States v. Google LLC (2020)

The rapid growth of the U.S. tech industry in the 1990s led to concerns about potential for anti-competitive behavior in the sector.{{Cite web |last=Swartz |first=Jon |date=2021-12-27 |title=Big Tech heads for 'a year of thousands of tiny tech papercuts,' but what antitrust efforts could make them bleed? |url=https://www.marketwatch.com/story/big-tech-heads-for-a-year-of-thousands-of-tiny-tech-papercuts-but-what-antitrust-efforts-could-make-them-bleed-11640640776 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220530190016/https://www.marketwatch.com/story/big-tech-heads-for-a-year-of-thousands-of-tiny-tech-papercuts-but-what-antitrust-efforts-could-make-them-bleed-11640640776 |archive-date=May 30, 2022 |access-date=2022-05-30 |website=MarketWatch |language=EN-US}} This ultimately led to the federal government launching an antitrust suit against Microsoft, alleging that the company unfairly hindered competition.

In the 2010s, concerns about potential anti-competitive behavior by "Big Tech" (Google, Apple, Amazon, Meta) companies became subject to lawmaker scrutiny. On October 6, 2020, the Democratic majority staff on the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative Law released a nearly 450-page report following a 16-month long investigation concluding that the companies wield "monopoly power".{{Cite web |last=Feiner |first=Lauren |date=2020-10-06 |title=House Democrats say Facebook, Amazon, Alphabet, Apple enjoy 'monopoly power' and recommend big changes |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/06/house-democrats-say-facebook-amazon-alphabet-apple-enjoy-monopoly-power.html |access-date=2022-05-30 |website=CNBC |language=en |archive-date=May 30, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220530190017/https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/06/house-democrats-say-facebook-amazon-alphabet-apple-enjoy-monopoly-power.html |url-status=live }}

In 2008, scrutiny by the DOJ and the Canadian Competition Bureau scrutiny of an advertising deal between Google and Yahoo! led the companies to abandon their agreement. According to the DOJ, the "agreement between these two companies accounting for 90 percent or more of each relevant market" would have likely harmed "competition in the markets for Internet search advertising and Internet search syndication".{{Cite web |date=2008-11-05 |title=#08-981: Yahoo! Inc. and Google Inc. Abandon Their Advertising Agreement (2008-11-05) |url=https://www.justice.gov/archive/opa/pr/2008/November/08-at-981.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220530190016/https://www.justice.gov/archive/opa/pr/2008/November/08-at-981.html |archive-date=May 30, 2022 |access-date=2022-05-30 |website=United States Department of Justice}}

File:Google web search.png holds an unlawful monopoly in the search engine market]]

In 2011, members of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) voted to demand information from Google as part of an antitrust inquiry into the company's search engine practices. Following a nineteen-month investigation, FTC staff attorneys recommended that the agency bring forth an antitrust lawsuit against Google. However, the members of the commissioners ultimately declined this recommendation, and voted on January 3, 2013, to close the investigation.{{Cite web |last=Nylen |first=Leah |date=2021-03-16 |title=How Washington fumbled the future |url=https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/16/google-files-ftc-antitrust-investigation-475573 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220531215151/https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/16/google-files-ftc-antitrust-investigation-475573 |archive-date=May 31, 2022 |access-date=2022-05-29 |website=Politico |language=en}}

During the 2010s, the European Commission engaged in antitrust scrutiny of Google, leading to the company being found guilty of competition law breaches in three separate cases.{{Cite web |last=Feiner |first=Lauren |date=2020-12-18 |title=Google's antitrust mess: Here are all the major cases it's facing in the U.S. and Europe |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/18/google-antitrust-cases-in-us-and-europe-overview.html |access-date=2022-05-29 |website=CNBC |language=en |archive-date=May 29, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220529201533/https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/18/google-antitrust-cases-in-us-and-europe-overview.html |url-status=live }} The United States v. Google lawsuit has been specifically compared to the European Commission's lawsuit against Google's Android practices.{{Cite web |last=Bergqvist |first=Christian |date=2020-11-12 |title=What the Department of Justice Can Learn from the European Union's Antitrust Investigations Into Google |url=https://www.promarket.org/2020/11/12/department-justice-european-union-antitrust-investigations-google-comparison-lessons/ |access-date=2022-05-30 |website=ProMarket |language=en-US |archive-date=May 30, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220530190017/https://www.promarket.org/2020/11/12/department-justice-european-union-antitrust-investigations-google-comparison-lessons/ |url-status=live }}

The Department of Justice (DOJ) formally brought the case on October 20, 2020, in conjunction with state attorneys general representing the following states: Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, South Carolina, and Texas.

Makan Delrahim, then serving as Assistant Attorney General for the DOJ Antitrust Division, had recused himself during the probe earlier in the year due to his past professional work for Google.{{Cite web |last1=Rund |first1=Jacob |last2=Holland |first2=Jake |last3=Beyoud |first3=Lydia |date=October 21, 2020 |title=DOJ Trots Out Corporate, Tech Veterans in Google Antitrust Probe |url=https://news.bloomberglaw.com/antitrust/doj-trots-out-corporate-tech-veterans-in-google-antitrust-probe |access-date=2022-05-29 |website=Bloomberg Law |language=en |archive-date=May 29, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220529201529/https://news.bloomberglaw.com/antitrust/doj-trots-out-corporate-tech-veterans-in-google-antitrust-probe |url-status=live }}

In United States v. Google LLC, the federal government alleges that Google has unfairly hindered competition in the search market through anti-competitive deals with Apple as well as mobile carriers.{{Cite news |last1=Kang |first1=Cecilia |last2=McCabe |first2=David |last3=Wakabayashi |first3=Daisuke |date=2020-10-20 |title=U.S. Accuses Google of Illegally Protecting Monopoly |language=en-US |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/20/technology/google-antitrust.html |access-date=2022-05-29 |issn=0362-4331 |archive-date=October 20, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201020123008/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/20/technology/google-antitrust.html |url-status=live }} The government alleges that, as a result of these practices, Google has accumulated control of around 88% of the domestic search engine market.

In doing so, the government alleges, Google has additionally monopolized the search advertising market at the expense of competing services.{{Cite news |last=Bokat-Lindell |first=Spencer |date=2020-10-22 |title=Opinion {{!}} The Case Against Google |language=en-US |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/22/opinion/google-lawsuit.html |access-date=2022-05-29 |issn=0362-4331 |archive-date=May 29, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220529203724/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/22/opinion/google-lawsuit.html |url-status=live }} Per the government's estimation, Google has been able to accumulate control of over 70% of the search advertising market. As a result of lack of competition, Google has been able to over-charge advertisers versus what they would pay in a competitive environment.{{Cite web |last=Kendall |first=Brent |date=October 21, 2020 |title=U.S. v. Google: A Guide to the Government's Lawsuit |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-v-google-a-guide-to-the-governments-lawsuit-11603227073 |website=The Wall Street Journal |access-date=May 29, 2022 |archive-date=May 29, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220529201529/https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-v-google-a-guide-to-the-governments-lawsuit-11603227073 |url-status=live }}

File:Jonathan Kanter, Assistant Attorney General.jpg (pictured) succeeded Makan Delrahim, who served under Trump, as Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division in 2021. ]]Owing to the accusation that Google engaged in anti-competitive conduct through exclusivity dealings with Apple, it was reported in February 2022 that the government was looking to depose "Apple's most senior executives".{{Cite news |date=2022-02-11 |title=Top Apple executives likely to be deposed in U.S. fight with Google |language=en |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/technology/top-apple-executives-likely-be-deposed-us-fight-with-google-2022-02-11/ |access-date=2022-05-30 |archive-date=May 30, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220530213947/https://www.reuters.com/technology/top-apple-executives-likely-be-deposed-us-fight-with-google-2022-02-11/ |url-status=live }} On December 12, 2022, Google asked the court to toss out the case, arguing that it fairly achieved its dominant market share and that the DOJ's argument "relies on dubious antitrust arguments."{{Cite news |last=Bartz |first=Diane |date=2022-12-13 |title=Google asks court to toss out federal antitrust lawsuit |language=en |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/legal/google-asks-court-toss-out-federal-antitrust-lawsuit-2022-12-13/ |access-date=2022-12-14 |archive-date=December 14, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221214003653/https://www.reuters.com/legal/google-asks-court-toss-out-federal-antitrust-lawsuit-2022-12-13/ |url-status=live }}

As of 2023, Google is represented in the case by attorneys from Williams & Connolly, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, and Ropes & Gray.{{Cite web |last=Perlman |first=Matthew |date=2023-04-27 |title=Google Search Judge Needs More Info On Chat Sanctions Bid |url=https://www.law360.co.uk/articles/1602054/google-search-judge-needs-more-info-on-chat-sanctions-bid |access-date=2023-06-06 |website=Law360 |language=en |quote="Google is represented by John E. Schmidtlein, Benjamin M. Greenblum and Colette T. Connor of Williams & Connolly LLP, Wendy Huang Waszmer, Susan A. Creighton and Franklin M. Rubinstein of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati PC and Mark S. Popofsky and Matthew McGinnis of Ropes & Gray LLP." |archive-date=June 6, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230606024213/https://www.law360.co.uk/articles/1602054/google-search-judge-needs-more-info-on-chat-sanctions-bid |url-status=live }} On August 4, 2023, Judge Mehta ruled Google will not face allegations the search engine prioritized associated products over competitors in the trial, but will allow allegations over Google's use of anti-competitive contracts dealing with Search and Android to go to trial.{{Cite web |last=Fung |first=Brian |date=2023-08-04 |title=Judge narrows Trump-era Google antitrust case brought by states and the Justice Department. CNN Business |url=https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/04/tech/google-antitrust-lawsuit/index.html |access-date=2023-08-05 |website=CNN |language=en |archive-date=August 7, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240807161307/https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/04/tech/google-antitrust-lawsuit/index.html |url-status=live }}

In February 2023, the DOJ accused Google of destroying evidence relevant to the lawsuit, and requested that Google be formally sanctioned.{{Cite web |last=Michaels |first=Dave |date=2023-02-23 |title=Justice Department Says Google Destroyed Evidence Related to Antitrust Lawsuit |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/justice-department-says-google-destroyed-evidence-related-to-antitrust-lawsuit-5dad2d6 |access-date=2023-03-31 |website=The Wall Street Journal |language=en-US |archive-date=March 31, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230331020631/https://www.wsj.com/articles/justice-department-says-google-destroyed-evidence-related-to-antitrust-lawsuit-5dad2d6 |url-status=live }}{{Cite web |last=Fung |first=Brian |date=2023-02-23 |title=DOJ seeks court sanctions against Google over 'intentional destruction' of chat logs {{!}} CNN Business |url=https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/23/tech/doj-sanctions-google-intentional-destruction-chat-logs/index.html |access-date=2024-05-03 |website=CNN |language=en |archive-date=May 3, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240503062417/https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/23/tech/doj-sanctions-google-intentional-destruction-chat-logs/index.html |url-status=live }} The DOJ alleged that Google employees used an internal chat service with "autodelete" settings prior to and during the course of the lawsuit.{{Cite web |last=Papscun |first=Dan |date=2024-09-11 |title=Google Risks Attack Over Deleted Chats in Search Monopoly Trial |url=https://news.bloomberglaw.com/antitrust/google-chat-deletions-hang-sword-of-damocles-over-search-trial |access-date=2024-05-03 |website=Bloomberg Law |language=en |archive-date=August 7, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240807161655/https://news.bloomberglaw.com/antitrust/google-chat-deletions-hang-sword-of-damocles-over-search-trial |url-status=live }} According to the DOJ, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure meant that Google should have ceased the use of auto-deletion of employee chat messages as early as May 2019 in anticipation of a federal lawsuit. Similar accusations were made in the Epic Games v. Google antitrust case.{{Cite web |last=Perez |first=Sarah |date=2023-02-27 |title=DoJ accuses Google of deleting chats in its antitrust investigation, similar to Fortnite's case |url=https://techcrunch.com/2023/02/27/doj-accuses-google-of-deleting-chats-in-its-antitrust-investigation-similar-to-fortnites-case/ |access-date=2024-05-03 |website=TechCrunch |language=en-US |archive-date=August 7, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240807161758/https://techcrunch.com/2023/02/27/doj-accuses-google-of-deleting-chats-in-its-antitrust-investigation-similar-to-fortnites-case/ |url-status=live }}

Following the confirmation of Jonathan Kanter as Assistant Attorney General for the DOJ Antitrust Division, Google questioned Kanter's impartiality in the case given his past work for rival companies.{{Cite web |title=Google, Backed by Hogan Lovells, Asks DOJ to Investigate Kanter Recusal |url=https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2021/11/22/google-backed-by-hogan-lovells-asks-doj-to-investigate-kanter-recusal/ |access-date=2022-05-29 |website=National Law Journal |language=en |archive-date=May 21, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220521175903/https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2021/11/22/google-backed-by-hogan-lovells-asks-doj-to-investigate-kanter-recusal/ |url-status=live }}

Constitutional scholar Laurence Tribe criticized Google's claims, arguing they have "little legal basis and strain common sense".{{Cite web |last=Tribe |first=Laurence |date=2022-02-01 |title=Google's Calls for Jonathan Kanter's Recusal Are Baseless |url=https://www.promarket.org/2022/02/01/google-antitrust-kanter-doj-recusal-baseless-tribe/ |access-date=2022-05-29 |website=ProMarket |language=en-US |archive-date=June 22, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220622112744/https://www.promarket.org/2022/02/01/google-antitrust-kanter-doj-recusal-baseless-tribe/ |url-status=live }} In May 2022, it was reported that Kanter would be barred from working on the case as the DOJ considers mandating his recusal.{{Cite news |last=Nylen |first=Leah |date=2022-05-10 |title=Antitrust Chief Barred From Google Cases Amid Recusal Push |language=en |work=Bloomberg.com |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-10/antitrust-chief-barred-from-google-cases-pending-recusal-ruling |access-date=2022-05-29 |archive-date=August 7, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240807161802/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-05-10/antitrust-chief-barred-from-google-cases-pending-recusal-ruling |url-status=live }}

Google's demands that Kanter recuse himself was met with criticism from politicians from both major parties. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), a Democrat, accused Google of engaging in bullying tactics.{{Cite web |last=Brody |first=Ben |date=2022-01-05 |title=Elizabeth Warren wants Jonathan Canter on the Google lawsuit - Protocol |url=https://www.protocol.com/bulletins/warren-google-kanter-recusal |access-date=2023-10-19 |website=Protocol |language=en |archive-date=October 31, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231031143742/https://www.protocol.com/bulletins/warren-google-kanter-recusal |url-status=live }} Kanter was ultimately cleared by the DOJ to participate in the department's scrutiny of Google in January 2023.{{Cite web |last=Sisco |first=Josh |date=2023-01-13 |title=DOJ antitrust chief cleared to oversee Google probes |url=https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/13/doj-antitrust-chief-cleared-to-oversee-google-probes-00077966 |access-date=2023-03-31 |website=POLITICO |language=en |archive-date=March 20, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230320021306/https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/13/doj-antitrust-chief-cleared-to-oversee-google-probes-00077966 |url-status=live }}

The trial started on September 12, 2023, with Kenneth Dintzer as DOJ's lead attorney.{{Cite news |last1=Sisco |first1=Josh |last2=Bordelon |first2=Brendan |date=2023-09-12 |title=Google's antitrust trial for the 'future of the internet' starts up |language=en |url=https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/12/google-antitrust-trial-internet-monopoly-00115269 |access-date=2023-10-07 |archive-date=October 7, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231007081307/https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/12/google-antitrust-trial-internet-monopoly-00115269 |url-status=live }} In its opening statements, the DOJ accused Google of unlawfully maintaining a monopoly in the search engine market as early as 2010.{{Cite web |last=Choi |first=Inyoung |date=2023-09-15 |title=DOJ v. Google: Landmark antitrust case wraps up first week |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/doj-v-google-landmark-antitrust-case-wraps-first-week-rcna105079 |access-date=2023-10-19 |website=NBC News |language=en |archive-date=February 25, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240225130731/https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/doj-v-google-landmark-antitrust-case-wraps-first-week-rcna105079 |url-status=live }} Google has defended itself from these accusations, with the company arguing that the high quality of its search products allows it to maintain a dominant position in the market.{{Cite news |last=Bartz |first=Diane |date=2023-10-18 |title=Google executive defends search quality in US antitrust trial |language=en |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/technology/google-executive-defends-search-quality-us-antitrust-trial-2023-10-18/ |access-date=2023-10-19 |archive-date=October 31, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231031230838/https://www.reuters.com/technology/google-executive-defends-search-quality-us-antitrust-trial-2023-10-18/ |url-status=live }}

During the trial, Judge Mehta received criticism for closing courtroom access for certain testimonies in the case and for delaying the release of public documents pertaining to the case.{{Cite web |last=Patel |first=Nilay |date=2023-10-16 |title=The Google antitrust trial has been frustratingly locked down — the NYT just filed a motion to open it up |url=https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/16/23919243/google-antitrust-trial-locked-down-nyt-motion-open-it-up-transparency |access-date=2024-05-03 |website=The Verge |language=en |archive-date=August 7, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240807161701/https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/16/23919243/google-antitrust-trial-locked-down-nyt-motion-open-it-up-transparency |url-status=live }}{{Cite news |last=Nover |first=Scott |date=2023-10-25 |title=Google's on Trial. No Looking. |url=https://slate.com/technology/2023/10/google-trial-secret-redactions-trade-secrets-closed-door-testimony.html |access-date=2024-05-03 |work=Slate |language=en-US |issn=1091-2339 |archive-date=August 6, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240806123142/https://slate.com/technology/2023/10/google-trial-secret-redactions-trade-secrets-closed-door-testimony.html |url-status=live }} Media companies including Bloomberg News filed a motion to increase public trial access.{{Cite web |last=Papscun |first=Dan |date=2023-08-18 |title=Judge Deciding Google Antitrust Fate Criticized for Closed Court |url=https://news.bloomberglaw.com/antitrust/judge-deciding-google-antitrust-fate-criticized-for-closed-court |access-date=2024-05-03 |website=Bloomberg Law |language=en |quote="Mehta has been criticized for how often he’s closed his courtroom for certain testimony, and delaying a ruling on when trial exhibits could be made public. That’s a departure from much of his prior practice. For example, in prosecutions of people involved in the Jan. 6 attack on the US Capitol, he regularly left the courtroom open." |archive-date=May 3, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240503062428/https://news.bloomberglaw.com/antitrust/judge-deciding-google-antitrust-fate-criticized-for-closed-court |url-status=live }} Following a week of deliberations between both parties, Mehta decided on September 27 that the DOJ would be permitted to publicly release documents shown in the trial.{{Cite web |last=Robertson |first=Adi |date=2023-09-27 |title=The Google antitrust trial is opening back up... a little |url=https://www.theverge.com/2023/9/27/23892215/google-search-antitrust-trial-documents-public-again-judge-mehta-rules |access-date=2024-05-03 |website=The Verge |language=en |archive-date=August 6, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240806083314/https://www.theverge.com/2023/9/27/23892215/google-search-antitrust-trial-documents-public-again-judge-mehta-rules |url-status=live }}

Much of the trial centered on Google's deal with Apple to have Google search as the default option on the Safari web browser.{{Cite web |last=Kruppa |first=Miles |date=2023-09-26 |title=Google Trial Spills Details on Search Engine's Deals With Apple, Samsung |url=https://www.wsj.com/tech/google-trial-spills-details-on-search-engines-deals-with-apple-samsung-f8aaa467 |access-date=2023-10-19 |website=WSJ |language=en-US |archive-date=March 24, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240324043435/https://www.wsj.com/tech/google-trial-spills-details-on-search-engines-deals-with-apple-samsung-f8aaa467 |url-status=live }}{{Cite web |last=Pierce |first=David |date=2023-10-11 |title=The Google trial shows that Apple's search deal is the most important contract in tech |url=https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/11/23913287/us-v-google-apple-search-deal |access-date=2023-10-19 |website=The Verge |language=en |archive-date=August 7, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240807161232/https://www.theverge.com/2023/10/11/23913287/us-v-google-apple-search-deal |url-status=live }} Witnesses from Google, Verizon and Samsung testified about the impact of Google's annual payments of approximately $10 billion to maintain default status for Google search.{{Cite news |last=Bartz |first=Diane |date=2023-10-12 |title=Five things to know about the Google antitrust trial as it hits halfway mark |language=en |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/technology/five-things-know-about-google-antitrust-trial-it-hits-halfway-mark-2023-10-12/ |access-date=2023-10-19}} Following the culmination of the government's case in the week of October 19, 2023, Google began its defense in court on October 26.{{Cite news |last=Nylen |first=Leah |date=2023-10-19 |title=DOJ Google Antitrust Case Wraps With Apple Deal on Center Stage |url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-10-19/doj-google-antitrust-case-wraps-with-apple-deal-on-center-stage |access-date=2023-10-19 |work=Bloomberg |language=en |archive-date=October 19, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231019174006/https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-10-19/doj-google-antitrust-case-wraps-with-apple-deal-on-center-stage |url-status=live }} The trial ended up concluding on November 16, 2023.{{Cite web |date=2023-11-16 |title=US wraps up antitrust case against Google in historic trial |url=https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-wraps-up-antitrust-case-against-google-historic-trial-2023-11-16/ |access-date=2024-02-19 |website=Reuters}}

Following the trial, Judge Mehta announced that closing arguments in the suit would be held in May 2024, and indicated he was uncertain as to how he would end up ruling in the case.{{Cite news |last1=Michaels |first1=Dave |last2=Wolfe |first2=Jan |last3=Kruppa |first3=Miles |date=2023-11-16 |title=Google Antitrust Judge Says He Has 'No Idea' How He Will Rule |url=https://www.wsj.com/tech/google-antitrust-judge-says-he-has-no-idea-how-he-will-rule-4425642c |access-date=2024-02-20 |work=WSJ |language=en-US |archive-date=August 7, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240807162204/https://www.wsj.com/tech/google-antitrust-judge-says-he-has-no-idea-how-he-will-rule-4425642c |url-status=live }} Attorneys from both sides reconvened to make their arguments on May 3 and May 4, 2024.{{Cite news |last=McCabe |first=David |date=2024-05-02 |title=Strongest U.S. Challenge to Big Tech's Power Nears Climax in Google Trial |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/02/technology/google-antitrust-trial-closing-arguments.html |access-date=2024-05-03 |work=The New York Times |language=en-US |issn=0362-4331 |archive-date=August 7, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240807162302/https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/02/technology/google-antitrust-trial-closing-arguments.html |url-status=live }}

Reuters reported that legal analysts expect that there will likely be an appeal in the case, regardless of how it is decided. The case's decision is considered to set precedent potentially impacting other federal antitrust suits against "Big Tech" companies like Meta Platforms, Amazon, and Apple.

On August 5, 2024, Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google acted illegally to maintain a monopoly in "general search services and general text advertising".{{cite court |court=D.D.C.|opinion=Case Nos. 20-cv-3010 (APM), 20-cv-3715 (APM)|pinpoint=Conclusion|litigants=United States v. Google LLC| url=https://ia800602.us.archive.org/6/items/gov.uscourts.dcd.223205/gov.uscourts.dcd.223205.1033.0.pdf}}{{cite web |url=https://nytimes.com/2024/08/05/technology/google-antitrust-ruling.html |newspaper=The New York Times |date=August 5, 2024 |first=David |last=McCabe |title=Google Violated Antitrust Laws in Online Search, Judge Rules |access-date=August 5, 2024 |archive-date=August 7, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240807162206/https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/05/technology/google-antitrust-ruling.html |url-status=live }}{{cite web |url=https://cnn.com/2024/08/05/business/google-loses-antitrust-lawsuit-doj/index.html?utm_source=business_ribbon |first=Brian |last=Fung |website=CNN |date=August 5, 2024 |title=Google loses massive antitrust lawsuit over its search dominance |access-date=August 5, 2024 |archive-date=August 5, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240805190629/https://www.cnn.com/2024/08/05/business/google-loses-antitrust-lawsuit-doj/index.html?utm_source=business_ribbon |url-status=live }} After a hearing in September 2024, Mehta gave regulators until December 2024 to propose any penalties unto Google, and is likely to rule on those by August 2025.{{cite web|url=https://apnews.com/article/google-justice-department-antitrust-search-engine-punishment-6f3ea0c2851a01b94bdedefbd3979f45 |website=The Associated Press |first=Michael |last=Liedtke |date=September 6, 2024 |title=Judge gives US regulators until December to propose penalties for Google’s illegal search monopoly |access-date=September 9, 2024}}

The DOJ submitted their proposal on how to remedy Google's search monopoly on November 20, requesting that Judge Mehta should force the company to sell their Chrome web browser and either sell the Android operating system or bar making Google services mandatory on Android devices.{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/20/technology/google-search-chrome-doj.html |first=David |last=McCabe |newspaper=The New York Times |date=November 20, 2024 |title=U.S. Proposes Breakup of Google to Fix Search Monopoly |access-date=November 27, 2024}}{{cite web|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/11/21/google-chrome-doj-antitrust/ |first1=Aaron |last1=Gregg |first2=Gerrit |last2=de Vynck |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=November 21, 2024 |title=What the DOJ's breakup of Google, sale of Chrome means for the Internet |access-date=November 27, 2024}} The government also requested Mehta to render Google unable to enter into agreements resulting in them automatically being the default search browser, as well as to share company data to rivals for a decade.{{cite web|url=https://theverge.com/2024/11/20/24300617/doj-google-search-antitrust-chrome-breakup |first=Lauren |last=Feiner |website=The Verge |date=November 21, 2024 |title=DOJ says Google must sell Chrome to crack open its search monopoly |access-date=November 27, 2024}}{{cite web|url=https://wsj.com/tech/google-should-be-forced-to-sell-chrome-browser-justice-department-says-13602df9 |first1=Dave |last1=Michaels |first2=Miles |last2=Kruppa |journal=The Wall Street Journal |date=November 21, 2024 |url-access=subscription |title=Google Should Be Forced to Sell Chrome Browser, Justice Department Says |access-date=November 27, 2024}} Google had until December 20, 2024, to file their proposal, before a two-week remedies trial starting April 21, 2025.{{cite web|url=https://politico.com/news/2024/11/20/doj-unveils-plan-to-breakup-googles-monopoly-00190753 |date=November 20, 2024 |website=Politico |first=Brendan |last=Bordelon |title=DOJ asks judge to break up Google |access-date=November 27, 2024}}

Starting April 21, a 15-day trial is set to be held in order to determine what remedy, if any, should be imposed in order to correct Google's monopoly.{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/13/technology/trump-tech-antitrust-cases.html |first=David |last=McCabe |newspaper=The New York Times |date=April 13, 2025 |title=What to Know About Trump’s Antitrust Efforts Against Tech Giants |access-date=April 15, 2025}} Judge Mehta allocated seven trial days each to the DOJ and Google each, with senior ChatGPT and Gemini officials expected to testify.{{cite web|url=https://www.courthousenews.com/google-doj-hash-out-details-for-looming-remedies-phase-of-landmark-antitrust-trial/ |first=Ryan |last=Knappenberger |date=April 9, 2025 |title=Google, DOJ hash out details for looming remedies phase of landmark antitrust trial |website=Courthouse News |access-date=April 15, 2025}}

In a filing, the DOJ indicated that it would introduce about 400 exhibits over the course of the trial and call 19 witnesses, including multiple senior Google officials. Google listed 20 witnesses, including its' CEO Sundar Pichai, while describing the DOJ's proposal as "wildly overboard."{{cite web|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/15/business/antitrust-structure-deals-challenge.html |first=Steve |last=Lohr |date=April 15, 2025 |title=The U.S. Wants to Break Up Google and Meta. That Could Be Hard. |newspaper=The New York Times |access-date=April 15, 2025}}

The case has attracted public interest amid scrutiny of the four Big Tech companies. United States v. Google LLC has been compared to the United States v. Microsoft Corp. (2002), a noted antitrust case against Microsoft.{{Cite web |last=Rosoff |first=Matt |date=2020-10-20 |title=DOJ case against Google has strong echoes of Microsoft antitrust case |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/20/doj-case-against-google-has-strong-echoes-of-microsoft-antitrust-case.html |access-date=2022-05-30 |website=CNBC |language=en |archive-date=May 30, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220530190020/https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/20/doj-case-against-google-has-strong-echoes-of-microsoft-antitrust-case.html |url-status=live }}

According to John Newman of the University of Miami School of Law, "U.S. v. Google might be the first big case against Big Tech, but it likely won't be the last."{{Cite web |last=Carreras |first=Daniela |date=October 21, 2020 |title=United States v. Google LLC: Cracking Down on Big Tech |url=https://lawreview.law.miami.edu/united-states-v-google-llc-cracking-big-tech/ |website=University of Miami Law Review |access-date=May 29, 2022 |archive-date=August 12, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220812111320/https://lawreview.law.miami.edu/united-states-v-google-llc-cracking-big-tech/ |url-status=live }} Two months after United States v. Google was filed, the FTC would bring on an antitrust case against Facebook.{{Cite news |last1=Kang |first1=Cecilia |last2=Isaac |first2=Mike |date=2020-12-09 |title=U.S. and States Say Facebook Illegally Crushed Competition |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/09/technology/facebook-antitrust-monopoly.html |access-date=2022-05-29 |work=The New York Times |language=en-US |issn=0362-4331 |quote="The investigations already led to a lawsuit against Google, brought by the Justice Department two months ago, that accuses the search giant of illegally protecting a monopoly." |archive-date=May 29, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220529203723/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/09/technology/facebook-antitrust-monopoly.html |url-status=live }}

Polling by advocacy group Demand Progress in October 2020 found that respondents across party lines support the suit by a 48% to 36% margin, with 52% of Republicans and 49% of Democrats found to be in support.{{Cite web |last=Gold |first=Ashley |date=2020-10-28 |title=Exclusive: Poll shows bipartisan support for tech antitrust action |url=https://www.axios.com/2020/10/28/exclusive-poll-shows-bipartisan-support-for-tech-antitrust-action |access-date=2022-05-30 |website=Axios |language=en |archive-date=May 30, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220530190017/https://www.axios.com/2020/10/28/exclusive-poll-shows-bipartisan-support-for-tech-antitrust-action |url-status=live }} A survey of tech workers at various firms conducted by workplace app Blind in October 2020 found that 57% of tech employees polled believe the suit has merit, though only 13% of Google workers said the same.{{Cite web |last=Levitsky |first=Allison |date=October 21, 2020 |title=Lots of tech employees say Google anti-trust action has merit. Google workers say otherwise. |url=https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2020/10/21/blind-poll-google-antitrust.html |access-date=2022-05-30 |website=Silicon Valley Business Journal |archive-date=December 5, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221205145518/https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2020/10/21/blind-poll-google-antitrust.html |url-status=live }}

{{Multiple image

| image1 = Ted Cruz official 116th portrait.jpg

| image2 = Elizabeth Warren, official portrait, 114th Congress.jpg

| total_width = 200

| footer = Senators Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) spoke favorably about the lawsuit

}}

Politico noted that the filing of the lawsuit received praise from both Democratic and Republican politicians.{{Cite web |last=Lima |first=Cristiano |date=2020-10-20 |title=DOJ's Google suit meets bipartisan praise, but questions arise on its motives |url=https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/20/justice-department-google-antitrust-lawsuit-bipartisan-430367 |access-date=2023-06-01 |website=POLITICO |language=en |archive-date=June 1, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230601044611/https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/20/justice-department-google-antitrust-lawsuit-bipartisan-430367 |url-status=live }} Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) praised the DOJ for bringing forth a "legitimate, long-time-coming suit against Google for engaging in anti-competitive, manipulative, and often illegal conduct".{{Cite web |last=Kafka |first=Peter |date=2020-10-20 |title=Bill Barr and Elizabeth Warren find a common enemy: Google |url=https://www.vox.com/21524791/google-lawsuit-bill-barr-elizabeth-warren-antitrust |access-date=2022-05-30 |website=Vox |language=en |archive-date=May 30, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220530190017/https://www.vox.com/21524791/google-lawsuit-bill-barr-elizabeth-warren-antitrust |url-status=live }}

Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) also praised the lawsuit, arguing that "Google abuses its power not just in the search market by using its monopoly power to make billions, but it also uses it to try to censor the American People".{{Cite web |last=Sozzi |first=Brian |date=October 21, 2020 |title=Senator Ted Cruz: Big tech companies like Google are 'drunk on power' |url=https://www.yahoo.com/now/senator-ted-cruz-big-tech-companies-like-google-are-drunk-on-power-170905839.html |access-date=2022-05-30 |website=Yahoo! Finance |language=en-US |archive-date=August 7, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240807161151/https://finance.yahoo.com/news/senator-ted-cruz-big-tech-companies-like-google-are-drunk-on-power-170905839.html |url-status=live }} The suit received additional praise from Republican Senators Mike Lee (R-UT) and Josh Hawley (R-MO).

Representative Steve Cohen (D-TN) criticized the timing of the case, which was filed just weeks before the 2020 presidential election. On Twitter, Cohen questioned the DOJ's decision to launch the suit so close to the election:

"Why did the #Trump Administration wait until TWO WEEKS before the election to file a lawsuit over #Google's monopoly power? Call me cynical, but if #antitrust enforcement was a real priority at #DOJ, why did they wait until now?"

Eric Schmidt, formerly CEO of both Google and parent company Alphabet Inc., criticized the lawsuit, stating that "There's a difference between dominance and excellence".{{Cite web |last=Copeland |first=Rob |date=October 21, 2020 |title=Former Google CEO Fires Back at Justice Department's Antitrust Suit |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/former-google-ceo-fires-back-at-justice-departments-antitrust-suit-11603309994 |website=The Wall Street Journal |access-date=May 30, 2022 |archive-date=May 30, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220530214310/https://www.wsj.com/articles/former-google-ceo-fires-back-at-justice-departments-antitrust-suit-11603309994 |url-status=live }} On Twitter, Google denied the DOJ's allegations, with the company stating that consumers use "Google because they choose to -- not because they're forced to or because they can't find alternatives."{{Cite web |date=2021-04-20 |title=Justice Dept. files landmark antitrust case against Google |url=https://apnews.com/article/google-justice-department-antitrust-0510e8f9047956254455ec5d4db06044 |access-date=2023-06-01 |website=Associated Press |language=en |archive-date=June 1, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230601044611/https://apnews.com/article/google-justice-department-antitrust-0510e8f9047956254455ec5d4db06044 |url-status=live }}

In December 2020, 38 states brought on a similar lawsuit against Google. Co-led by Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, the State of Colorado et al. v. Google LLC{{Cite web |last=Perlman |first=Matthew |date=December 17, 2020 |title=Google Hit With 3rd Monopolization Suit |url=https://www.law360.com/articles/1338900/google-hit-with-3rd-monopolization-suit |access-date=2022-05-29 |website=Law360 |language=en |quote="The case is State of Colorado et al. v. Google LLC, case number 1:20-cv-03715, in the U.S. District Court for District of Columbia." |archive-date=August 7, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240807162209/https://www.law360.com/articles/1338900/google-hit-with-3rd-monopolization-suit |url-status=live }} case reportedly "goes beyond the DOJ's" in its scope of accusations, according to CNBC.{{Cite web |last=Feiner |first=Lauren |date=2020-12-17 |title=Google hit with its third antitrust lawsuit since October, this time by a bipartisan coalition of states |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/17/google-faces-a-third-government-antitrust-lawsuit.html |access-date=2022-05-29 |website=CNBC |language=en |archive-date=May 29, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220529201529/https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/17/google-faces-a-third-government-antitrust-lawsuit.html |url-status=live }}

In July 2021, attorneys general from 36 states and the District of Columbia (D.C.) launched an antitrust lawsuit alleging that Google has hindered competition in the app market through its Google Play store policies.{{Cite web |last=Feiner |first=Lauren |date=2021-07-07 |title=States bring a new antitrust suit against Google over its mobile app store |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/07/states-bring-new-antitrust-suit-against-google-over-google-play.html |access-date=2022-05-29 |website=CNBC |language=en |archive-date=May 29, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220529201535/https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/07/states-bring-new-antitrust-suit-against-google-over-google-play.html |url-status=live }} In September 2023, all fifty states as well as D.C. and Puerto Rico reportedly "reached an agreement in principle" to settle the case.{{Cite web |date=2023-09-06 |title=Google reaches tentative settlement with all 50 states over alleged app store monopoly |url=https://apnews.com/business/colombia-mobile-apps-alphabet-inc-software-legal-proceedings-28c38a5f6981ffd856dc12d4bf3c4537 |access-date=2023-10-19 |website=AP News |language=en |archive-date=February 4, 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240204063548/https://apnews.com/business/colombia-mobile-apps-alphabet-inc-software-legal-proceedings-28c38a5f6981ffd856dc12d4bf3c4537 |url-status=live }}

In January 2023, the DOJ filed a second antitrust suit against Google centered on alleged anti-competitive conduct in the advertising technology (adtech) market.{{Cite web |last=Feiner |first=Lauren |title=DOJ files second antitrust lawsuit against Google |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/24/doj-files-second-antitrust-lawsuit-against-google.html |access-date=2023-01-24 |website=CNBC |date=January 24, 2023 |language=en |archive-date=January 24, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230124174856/https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/24/doj-files-second-antitrust-lawsuit-against-google.html |url-status=live }} A spokesperson for Google denied the allegations of the lawsuit and accused the DOJ of trying to "pick winners and losers in the highly competitive advertising technology sector.”{{Cite web |last1=Kruppa |first1=Miles |last2=Schechner |first2=Sam |last3=Michaels |first3=Dave |date=2023-01-24 |title=DOJ Sues Google, Seeking to Break Up Online Advertising Business |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-sues-google-for-alleged-antitrust-violations-in-its-ad-tech-business-11674582792 |access-date=2023-03-31 |website=The Wall Street Journal |language=en-US |archive-date=March 31, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230331021611/https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-sues-google-for-alleged-antitrust-violations-in-its-ad-tech-business-11674582792 |url-status=live }} The trial began on September 9, 2024 and concluded on September 27, 2024.

In addition to both ongoing federal antitrust lawsuits against Google, it was reported in 2022 that the DOJ was in the process of investigating if Google has engaged in anti-competitive conduct through bundling its Google Maps service with company software.{{Cite news |last1=Bartz |first1=Diane |last2=Dave |first2=Paresh |date=2022-03-30 |title=Exclusive: U.S. probe of Google Maps picks up speed |language=en |work=Reuters |url=https://www.reuters.com/business/exclusive-us-probe-google-maps-picks-up-speed-sources-2022-03-30/ |access-date=2022-05-29 |archive-date=May 29, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220529201529/https://www.reuters.com/business/exclusive-us-probe-google-maps-picks-up-speed-sources-2022-03-30/ |url-status=live }} In 2023, Politico reported that the probe focuses on the Google Automotive Services (GAS) offering provided to automakers, which includes the Maps service, the Play store, and Google's voice assistant. The probe also scrutinizes Google's control of location data through Google Maps.{{Cite web |last=Sisco |first=Josh |date=2023-02-22 |title=DOJ pushes ahead with Google Maps antitrust probe |url=https://www.politico.com/news/2023/02/22/doj-google-maps-antitrust-probe-00084058 |access-date=2023-04-02 |website=POLITICO |language=en |archive-date=April 2, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230402014615/https://www.politico.com/news/2023/02/22/doj-google-maps-antitrust-probe-00084058 |url-status=live }}

• Antitrust cases against Google
• Antitrust cases against Google by the European Union
• Big Tech

{{reflist}}

• [https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/18552824/united-states-of-america-v-google-llc/ United States v. Google LLC (1:20-cv-03010)] docket

{{United States antitrust law|state=collapsed}}

{{Google litigation}}

Category:United States antitrust case law

Category:Google litigation

Category:2020 in United States case law

Category:United States District Court for the District of Columbia cases