GOOGLE MOVES TO APPEAL RULING IN SEARCH MONOPOLY CASE. (PHOTO).

 

Google moves to appeal ruling in search monopoly case

Google filed an appeal Friday challenging a federal judge’s ruling that the company holds an illegal monopoly in internet search. The appeal could delay the implementation of court-ordered remedies while the case moves through the legal system.

In a blog post, Google Vice President of Regulatory Affairs Lee-Anne Mulholland said the 2024 ruling “ignored the reality that people use Google because they want to, not because they’re forced to,” and argued that it “failed to account for the rapid pace of innovation and intense competition from established players and well-funded start-ups.”

The antitrust trial began in September 2023, and in August 2024, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act, confirming that the company holds a monopoly in search and related advertising. Following the ruling, Google indicated it would likely appeal.

In spring 2025, Google and the Department of Justice participated in a remedies trial to determine what actions the company would need to take. The trial included testimony from Apple, Mozilla, OpenAI, and other competitors. In September 2025, Mehta rejected the DOJ’s most severe proposed consequences, including forcing Google to sell its Chrome browser, a decision seen as a partial victory for the company that sent its stock up 8%.

Mehta finalized the remedies in December, requiring Google to share some of its raw search interaction data used to train its ranking and AI systems but sparing the company from disclosing its algorithms. The ruling also limits Google’s ability to enter into agreements like its previous search deal with Apple, specifying that such contracts must end within one year. Analysts at the time described the remedies as relatively light.

In Friday’s filing, Google asked to pause implementation of the court mandates, arguing that the requirements could compromise user privacy and discourage competitors from developing independent products, ultimately hindering innovation.