Google Is Fighting a Court Order to Change How Search Works

Google has filed an appeal after a federal judge ruled in August 2024 that the company illegally uses its power to keep competitors out of the search market. The appeal was filed Friday with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. At the same time, the Department of Justice has filed its own appeal, arguing the judge did not go far enough in punishing Google.

This sets up a legal battle over two things: whether Google actually broke the law, and if so, what Google should have to do about it.

What the Judge Found

Judge Amit Mehta decided that Google broke antitrust law — the rules that prevent one company from unfairly controlling a market. The court found that Google controls more than 89% of all internet searches, and 95% of searches on phones.

The judge said Google got and kept this power through unfair deals. Specifically, Google paid device makers, phone companies, and web browsers to make Google Search the default search engine. When Google is already set as the default, most people never bother to switch to something else.

This is the core of the case: Google's size became even bigger because it paid to be everywhere people look first.

What Has to Change

The judge ordered several changes to how Google does business. The most direct one: Google cannot pay for exclusive deals that make it the default search on devices and browsers.

The judge also ordered Google to share certain information with competitors — specifically, data about what people search for and how they interact with search results. This data is valuable because better search engines learn from what millions of people actually do. Competitors without access to this information cannot improve their engines as easily.

Google also has to let rivals use its search advertising service, which is how Google makes money from search in the first place.

These are big changes. For decades, Google's default position on phones and browsers meant more searches, which meant more data to improve its engine, which made it the obvious choice for the next new phone or browser. Breaking that cycle is what the judge is trying to do.

Why Both Sides Are Unhappy

Google's appeal says the judge made legal mistakes. The company argues that exclusive deals for default search are not actually illegal, because people can still use other search engines if they want to — they just have to choose them.

The Department of Justice filed a cross-appeal because it thinks the judge's remedies do not go far enough. The government believes the changes ordered will not actually create real competition. The exact nature of the government's concerns is currently sealed in court documents, but typically these cross-appeals signal the government wants broader or stricter requirements.

This kind of disagreement is not unusual in big antitrust cases. Both sides can lose in court and still appeal.

Why This Matters Beyond Google

This case echoes an earlier antitrust battle from the late 1990s against Microsoft. Back then, the court found that Microsoft broke the law by bundling its Internet Explorer browser with its Windows operating system. Microsoft appealed for years, the case eventually settled, and competition in browsers changed the market — though not in ways anyone fully predicted at the time.

The broader pattern here is that the government has been increasingly willing to take on large tech companies. The case was originally filed under the Trump administration but has continued under the Biden administration's more aggressive approach to antitrust. Forty-nine states, two territories, and Washington D.C. all joined the case, which is rare and shows unusual agreement across party lines.

What happens in this case will likely set the template for how the government handles similar complaints against Apple, Amazon, Meta, and other large tech platforms.

How Long Will This Take

Major antitrust appeals typically take 12 to 18 months for arguments and a decision. The Court of Appeals in Washington D.C. hears a lot of technology cases, and the court's decision here could potentially go all the way to the Supreme Court.

While the appeal happens, Google will likely operate under the judge's current orders unless it successfully argues that the orders are so unfair or disruptive that they should be paused while the case plays out. That argument is a high bar to clear.

The Real Question Ahead

The appeals court could uphold the monopoly finding and change the remedies, or change the findings themselves, or do some combination. The court could also limit what those rulings mean for future cases against other tech companies.

What happens next will reshape how search engines, phone makers, and browsers make deals with each other. It will also set the rules for whether other tech giants have done the same kind of thing. This case is likely to be the framework for how the U.S. handles Big Tech antitrust for the next ten years or more.