Legal Experts Urge Caution in Google Antitrust Case

On May 6, a collection of former antitrust officials from the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission filed an amicus brief in a landmark antitrust case targeting Google’s search engine monopoly. While the brief claimed neutrality—stating it was “in support of neither party”—its recommendations aligned closely with arguments made by Google’s legal team, according to the New York Post.

The legal filing comes as U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta prepares to decide how to curb Google’s dominance over online search. In a previous ruling, Judge Mehta determined that Google was unlawfully monopolizing the market. The Department of Justice has since proposed sweeping remedies, including a forced divestment of the Chrome web browser and the mandated sharing of search data with competitors.

The attorneys behind the brief urged Judge Mehta to resist such aggressive remedies. They argued that antitrust law has limits and that overreach could harm innovation and even national security—an argument that echoes Google’s own defense in the case.

Read more: Judge Dismisses Key Claims Against Google in Publishers’ Piracy Suit

However, the independence of the brief’s authors has been called into question. Several contributors have professional links to Google and other major tech firms. Joe Sims, one of the signatories, previously downplayed concerns over Google’s deletion of evidence during litigation, describing it as “silly.” Another contributor, Willard Tom, has previously represented Google in legal action initiated by Epic Games over alleged anticompetitive behavior.

These connections have not gone unnoticed by critics. Sacha Haworth, executive director of the Tech Oversight Project, expressed concern over what she views as a lack of impartiality. “It speaks volumes that the only people rushing to Google’s defense are people paid by Google to care,” Haworth told The New York Post. She argued that dismantling parts of Google’s empire would ultimately benefit consumers by fostering competition and reducing prices.

The Justice Department’s proposal outlines more than just the breakup of Chrome. It includes barring Google from paying companies like Apple to make its search engine the default on mobile devices. In the event that primary remedies fail, the DOJ has also floated the possibility of breaking up Android, Google’s mobile operating system.

Judge Mehta is expected to deliver a ruling by August that could have wide-ranging implications not just for Google, but for the broader tech landscape in the U.S.

Source: The New York Post