On March 8, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) made headlines once again in its ongoing antitrust battle with Google. In a new court filing, the DOJ confirmed it is still seeking a Chrome browser divestiture to break up Google’s dominance in online search. However, in a significant shift, the department dropped its demand for forced sell-offs of Google’s AI investments, such as those in Anthropic. Instead, the new proposal requires Google to provide advance notification of any future AI partnerships or acquisitions, signaling a more measured approach to regulating artificial intelligence while keeping the spotlight firmly on search market monopolization.
Why Chrome Divestiture Remains Central
The DOJ argues that Google’s control over both its search engine and the Chrome browser creates a powerful default ecosystem that locks out rivals. By bundling search defaults within Chrome, Google allegedly cements its market dominance, leaving competitors like Bing, DuckDuckGo, and smaller search engines struggling to gain fair distribution.
The divestiture proposal is seen as the most effective structural remedy to:
- Break the cycle of default search dominance.
- Open the browser market to fair competition.
- Ensure Chrome operates independently, without favoring one search provider.
Regulators believe that behavioral remedies alone, such as temporary bans on exclusive contracts, won’t be sufficient. Instead, selling Chrome outright is viewed as a long-term structural solution to restore competition.
AI Oversight: From Forced Sell-Offs to Pre-Clearance
In earlier drafts, the DOJ considered forcing Google to unwind its AI investments, including stakes in Anthropic, a leading AI safety and research firm. However, the new March 8 filing replaced that demand with a pre-clearance system. Under this framework, Google must notify regulators before investing in or partnering with AI companies in the future.
This shift reflects the complexities of the AI market:
- Forced divestitures could disrupt innovation and create instability in startups.
- AI partnerships are fast-evolving, making blanket bans impractical.
- Pre-clearance allows regulators to monitor Google’s influence without stifling legitimate collaboration.
In effect, the DOJ is signaling that AI oversight is necessary but should be proportionate and flexible compared to the more clear-cut monopoly issues in search.
Google’s Response
Unsurprisingly, Google strongly opposes the proposed divestiture of Chrome. The company argues that breaking up its browser from its ecosystem would:
- Harm the user experience.
- Undermine security and product integration.
- Fail to address the DOJ’s concerns effectively.
Google instead suggests contract-based remedies, such as limiting exclusive deals and providing more transparency in advertising practices. However, antitrust experts note that Google is highly likely to appeal any structural remedy, potentially dragging the case through years of litigation.
What Happens Next
The case is now moving toward a remedies hearing, expected to take place in spring 2025. Judge Amit Mehta will review arguments from both sides and decide whether structural remedies like divestiture are justified. A ruling is anticipated later in 2025, though appeals could delay final outcomes.
Key developments to watch include:
- Whether the court approves a Chrome spin-off.
- How far behavioral remedies go in limiting Google’s default search agreements.
- The real-world effectiveness of the new AI oversight framework.
Conclusion
The DOJ’s March 8, 2025 filing represents a pivotal moment in the Google antitrust saga. While the government remains firm on its call to separate Chrome from Google, it has softened its stance on AI by choosing regulatory monitoring over immediate breakups. The case now stands at the crossroads of tech regulation, competition law, and innovation policy.
For the wider industry, the outcome will shape the future of web browsing, online search, and artificial intelligence regulation in the U.S. and beyond. If Chrome is forced to operate independently, the digital landscape could see its biggest shake-up in decades, potentially leveling the playing field for rival search engines.
