Google's Monopoly Endgame: DOJ's Final Remedies Demand Chrome Sale and Data Sharing

On March 7, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice and a coalition of 38 state attorneys general submitted their final proposed remedies to address Google's illegal monopoly over internet search, maintaining their demand that Google divest its Chrome browser and potentially its Android operating system.

The revised proposed final judgment, filed in D.C. federal district court, largely maintains the core elements of the initial proposal submitted in November 2024. It comes after Judge Amit P. Mehta ruled last August that Google had unlawfully maintained monopolies in U.S. general search services and general search text advertising markets.

"We proved Google violated antitrust law in an epic federal trial," said Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti. "Now it's time to solve the problem. Today's proposed final remedies package holds Google accountable for its search monopoly and protects consumers by promoting competition."

The coalition, led by Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti and Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, has worked closely with the Justice Department to develop what they describe as a "comprehensive and legally sound proposal" designed to tear down barriers to entry and encourage renewed innovation in the monopolized markets.

At the heart of the proposal remains the requirement for Google to divest Chrome, which would permanently end Google's control of this critical search access point and allow rivals to access the browser that serves for many users as a gateway to the internet. According to court documents, more than 30 percent of search inquiries are routed through Chrome.

"Google must promptly and fully divest Chrome, along with any assets or services necessary to successfully complete the divestiture, to a buyer approved by the Plaintiffs in their sole discretion," the proposal states. The evaluation of any potential buyer would include their proposed business plans, investment strategies for the open-source Chromium project, and plans for sharing and protecting user data.

The final remedies package continues to propose a ban on all search-related payments to distribution partners, including Apple. This practice has been central to Google maintaining its search dominance, with evidence presented at trial showing that Google pays billions annually to Apple to remain the default search engine on Safari browsers.

Android divestiture remains contingent

While the initial proposal gave Google the option to divest Android immediately, the revised version makes Android divestiture contingent on the remedies proving insufficient. The proposal states: "If, at least five years after entry of this Final Judgment, if Plaintiffs demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that either or both monopolized markets have not experienced a substantial increase in competition, then Google shall divest Android."

Google would be able to avoid this outcome if it can show "by a preponderance of the evidence that its ownership or control of Android did not significantly contribute to the lack of a substantial increase in competition."

Changes to AI investment restrictions

One significant change from the initial proposal involves Google's investments in artificial intelligence companies. The DOJ is "no longer seeking the mandatory divestiture of Google's AI investments in favor of a prior notification for future investments," according to the executive summary.

This shift came after evidence gathered during remedies discovery indicated a risk that prohibiting Google from owning or acquiring interests in search rivals, search distributors, or rival query-based AI products "could cause unintended consequences in the evolving AI space."

Instead, the revised proposal requires Google to provide advance notification to plaintiffs before making investments in, collaborations with, or acquisitions of companies that compete with Google in search services or search text ads markets, or any company that controls a search access point or generative AI product.

Data sharing to address scale advantage

The remedy proposal also requires Google to share critical data to erode what the DOJ calls Google's "unlawfully gained scale advantages." According to court documents, the plan would require Google to:

1. Make critical portions of its search index available at marginal cost to rivals and potential rivals
2. Provide rivals with user-side data for ten years
3. Provide publishers and content creators with crawling data rights and opt-out options from having their content used to train Google's AI models
4. Syndicate its search results, ranking signals, and query understanding information for ten years

These provisions aim to address the "data feedback loops" that have helped entrench Google's dominance, according to the DOJ's filing.

Technical oversight committee

To ensure compliance with the final judgment, the proposal establishes a five-person Technical Committee with expertise in software engineering, information retrieval, artificial intelligence, economics, and behavioral science. This committee would monitor Google's compliance, handle complaints, and have access to Google's source code and algorithms.

The proposal also requires Google to designate an internal Compliance Officer responsible for administering Google's antitrust compliance program and ensuring adherence to the final judgment.

Google expected to file its own proposal

Google is expected to file its own revised proposal in response. In December, Google proposed its own changes to Android and browser contracts, which the DOJ characterized as "modest changes" that would "fall woefully short of restoring competition."

A hearing on the proposed remedies is scheduled to begin on April 21 and conclude by May 9. A final ruling is expected before September 2025. Google has already stated it would appeal the underlying decision.

Timeline of the case

• October 20, 2020: DOJ and initial group of states file antitrust lawsuit against Google
• December 17, 2020: Colorado-led coalition of states files related lawsuit
• August 5, 2024: Judge Mehta finds Google liable for monopolization under Section 2 of the Sherman Act
• November 20, 2024: Initial proposed final judgment filed
• March 7, 2025: Revised proposed final judgment filed
• April 21-May 9, 2025: Scheduled remedies hearing
• Before September 2025: Expected final ruling