Google Can Keep Its AI Search Answers, a Judge Says

A federal judge has dismissed two antitrust lawsuits against Google over AI Overviews, the AI-written answers at the top of search results. Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Penske Media Corporation and Chegg had failed to adequately argue violations of antitrust law. Engadget

Both companies said Google used those answers together with its search index to take visitors away from their sites. Think of the index as a giant library catalog of web pages. Their claim was simple. If Google shows the answer directly, people click less, and fewer clicks mean less ad money.

Chegg also claimed publishers faced pressure over distribution. It said websites had to let Google use their pages for AI answers or risk disappearing from search, with no practical way to stay listed but opt out of Overviews.

Penske Media filed its AI Overviews antitrust lawsuit against Google in 2025. The publisher claimed Google violated antitrust law by forcing publishers to allow AI Overviews of their content. Reuters

The rulings came from a judge who has ruled against Google before. In 2024, Mehta ruled Google had a monopoly in online search services. This time he concluded that earlier finding alone was not enough to support the new claims.

The broader context here is the gap between being powerful and breaking a specific law. Losing visitors, even when it hurts a business, is not enough for an antitrust case. A plaintiff must connect that loss to unfair tactics that block competition, and Mehta found that link had not been adequately made.

In my view, these decisions are more about the legal tool chosen than about whether AI answers are fair. Antitrust asks a narrow question about misuse of control over search. It does not decide whether summaries without a click are fair use, whether Google needs a license, or how publishers should be paid when answers are built from their pages. Those questions will likely return in different cases.

Worth flagging for product teams is the choice issue raised by Chegg. Should being listed in search and being used for AI answers have separate off switches. Separate switches give publishers more control but are harder to build and run. One combined switch is simpler but leaves more power with Google. That tradeoff will affect website traffic, payment talks and future opt-out tools.

Looking ahead, search will likely give more direct answers, not fewer. If AI handles basic questions, clicks may shift toward original reporting, unique data and real expertise. That is hard for sites that depend on lots of quick visits, but it rewards work readers truly want.