A U.S. federal judge has ruled that Alphabet‘s Google will not be forced to divest its Chrome browser or Android operating system. However, the tech giant must share search data with competitors to foster competition in the online search market. 

This ruling, handed down on Tuesday, September 2, 2025, by the U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta in Washington, marks a watershed moment in the ongoing battle between Big Tech and U.S. antitrust regulators.

The decision follows a five-year legal battle, highlighting Google’s online search and advertising dominance.

The ruling is a rare win for the tech giant. It avoids the more severe penalties proposed by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). Prosecutors had pushed for Google to sell off Chrome and cease multibillion-dollar payments to Apple and other device makers to secure its position as the default search engine. 

By this ruling, these payments, which the DOJ argued stifled competition, will continue. The decision sent Alphabet’s shares soaring 7.2% in extended trading. Apple, a key beneficiary of Google’s payments, saw its shares rise 3%.

Judge Mehta’s ruling also allows the company to retain its Android operating system. Chrome and Android are integral to its advertising business, which dominates the online market. Investors cheered the outcome, relieved that Google would not lose these critical assets. However, the mandate to share search data with rivals introduces new challenges for the company.

The Google five-year-long antitrust battle

The case dates back to 2020 during President Trump’s first tenure, when the DOJ filed a lawsuit accusing Google of illegally monopolising online search and related advertising markets. In 2024, Judge Mehta ruled that Google held an illegal monopoly, citing its lack of a “true competitor”. 

The trial that followed, beginning in April 2025, focused on remedies to restore competition. Prosecutors proposed a 10-year reformation plan, including divestitures and data-sharing mandates. The company countered that such measures were excessive and could harm consumers.

Mehta’s ruling reflects a cautious approach. He acknowledged the rapid evolution of the tech industry, driven by artificial intelligence (AI). 

“Ten years may seem like a short period, but in this space, a lot can change in weeks,” he wrote. 

The judge opted for remedies he believes are likely to withstand scrutiny from the Supreme Court, where the case is expected to end up. The company has already signalled its intent to appeal, a process that could delay implementation for years.

Data sharing: Not the victory envisaged 

The requirement to share search data with competitors is a significant blow to the company. It has expressed concerns about user privacy. In a blog post, Google stated that data sharing “will impact our users and their privacy, and we’re reviewing the decision closely.” 

Analysts argue that sharing data could weaken its competitive edge while strengthening rivals like Microsoft’s Bing or emerging AI-driven search platforms.

The DOJ and state attorneys general see data sharing as a way to level the playing field. Google’s search monopoly, they argue, gives it an unfair advantage in collecting user data, which fuels its advertising business. By sharing this data, competitors could improve their search algorithms and challenge Google’s dominance. 

However, the ruling stops short of forcing Google to divest its ad tech business, as proposed in a separate case.

Search: AI in the mix

Meanwhile, the rise of AI has added complexity to the case. Companies like OpenAI, with its ChatGPT chatbot, are eroding Google’s dominance in search. During the trial, OpenAI’s product head, Nick Turley, testified that access to Google’s search data could help improve ChatGPT’s capabilities. 

He even expressed interest in buying Chrome if it were put up for sale. However, Mehta questioned whether AI companies like OpenAI should be considered direct competitors in the search market.

The company is also leveraging AI to maintain its edge. CEO Sundar Pichai testified in April 2025 that Google hopes to integrate its Gemini AI technology into Apple devices by mid-2025. Such a deal could further entrench its position in the market. 

The DOJ has raised concerns that Google’s search monopoly gives it an unfair advantage in AI development, creating a feedback loop that reinforces its dominance.

The ruling is part of a broader crackdown on Big Tech. Meta, Amazon, and Apple are also facing antitrust lawsuits in the U.S. and abroad. 

In a separate case, the company was ordered to revamp its app store following a lawsuit by Epic Games. Additionally, the company faces a trial in September 2025 to address its dominance in online advertising technology. The DOJ has suggested that it should sell off parts of its ad tech business, a proposal the company is fiercely contesting.

In Europe, Google is under scrutiny as well. The European Commission is investigating its ad tech practices and compliance with the Digital Markets Act. A decision expected in the coming weeks could result in a modest fine. 

Similarly, Mexico’s antitrust watchdog is also nearing a ruling on Google’s digital advertising practices, with a potential fine of up to 8% of its annual Mexican revenue.

Google’s appeal could prolong the legal battle into 2027 or beyond. 

The case’s outcome will likely shape the future of online search and advertising. For now, Google retains its core assets but faces increased pressure to open up its data to competitors. This could empower smaller players and AI-driven platforms, potentially reshaping the internet space, as well as leading to more choices in online search for consumers.