Necessary Always Active
Necessary cookies are required to enable the basic features of this site, such as providing secure log-in or adjusting your consent preferences. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable data.
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Published on
September 3, 2025
5 min read
U.S. Court Verdict on Chrome-Android Antitrust Case Favours Google, Alphabet Stock Rallies
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta has rejected calls for a forced Google Chrome divestiture. Alphabet stock soared more than 6% on September 3, 2025 following the landmark ruling. According to Reuters, the Google Chrome-Android antitrust verdict gave the search giant a rare win in its battle with U.S. regulators.
Judge Mehta also ruled that Google can keep its Android operating system. The Chrome browser and the Android operating system enable the search giant to dominate the online advertising market.
Google Must Share Search Data
While favoring the search giant, the antitrust ruling insisted that Google must share search data with competitors to eliminate online search monopoly. The Google antitrust ruling is a result of a 5-year legal battle between the search giant and antitrust regulators in the U.S. For a long time, U.S. lawmakers and regulators have raised concerns about market dominance by major tech companies.
In August 2024, Judge Mehta ruled that the search engine was an illegal monopoly. After the Google monopoly ruling, attorneys at the Justice Department had to consider options to propose to the court. The Justice Department had pushed for a Google Chrome sell-off in court, something it had committed to do in November 2024.
But in his 2025 Google antitrust case verdict, Judge Mehta approached the proposed remedies with “humility”, highlighting the competition created by AI firms since the case started.
“Here the court is asked to gaze into a crystal ball and look to the future. Not exactly a judge’s forte,” the Judge wrote.
No Illegal Conduct on Google’s Part
According to Mehta, the task before the court entailed discerning between conduct that sustains a monopoly through anticompetitive acts from conduct that fuels the growth of a monopoly because of a superior product.
“After two complete trials, this court cannot find that Google’s market dominance is sufficiently attributable to its illegal conduct to justify divestiture,” the judge said about the Chrome browser, adding that this type of “radical structural relief” requires a more heightened causal connection.
Judge Mehta declined the request from the Justice Department for divestment of the Android operating system. In his verdict, the Judge ruled that the department “did not present any evidence to justify a contingent structural remedy.”
The U.S. antitrust regulator also wanted the court to compel the tech giant to end multi-billion dollar contracts that support its market dominance, which the judge declined saying,“Plaintiffs have not shown that their behavioral remedies will be ineffective without the immediate divestiture of Chrome.”
Positive Market Response
The market responded to Google’s antitrust ruling fast with shares of the search giant’s parent company Alphabet soaring 7.2% on September 2, 2025 as investors welcomed the ruling. Although sharing search data means more competition for Google’s ads unit, not selling Android or Chrome alleviates concerns for investors.
The antitrust ruling also means that the search giant can retain the Google-Apple Chrome deal. Under this deal, Google pays Apple $20 billion annually to make its search engine a default on its devices. Google continues to face growing competition from AI tools, including ChatGPT, which is already eroding the tech giant’s dominance in online search.
However, analysts say that although the data-sharing requirement presents a competitive risk to the search giant, this won’t happen right away.
“It will take a longer period of time for consumers to also embrace these new experiences,” Cantor Fitzgerald Analyst Deepak Mathivanan said.
Google says that it is concerned that sharing online search data could impact its “users and their privacy.” The company said it is reviewing the court’s decision closely. U.S. regulators have said they are considering the next step. Experts say the case will likely end up at the Supreme Court.
“Judge Mehta is aware that the Supreme Court is the likely final destination for the case, and he has chosen remedies that stand a good chance of acceptance by the Court,” George Washington University’s Competition Law Center Director, William Kovacic said.
