Google appeals search monopoly ruling, says it won business ‘fair and square’
Google has officially submitted its appeal against the federal court ruling that classified it as an illegal search monopolist, describing the decision as having “crashed” through established legal barriers. In its legal documents, Google maintains that it simply succeeded in the marketplace through fair competition. The company is seeking to overturn not only the original judgment but also the subsequent order mandating the sharing of search data with its competitors.
This appeal follows the earlier announcement by Google of its intention to contest the August 2024 ruling on illegal monopolization and the September 2025 decision regarding the remedial measures imposed. The appeal filing, made public on Friday, provides a clearer perspective on Google’s legal strategy against Judge Amit Mehta’s findings.
Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s vice president for regulatory affairs, emphasized in a statement that they are petitioning the court to reverse what they regard as a flawed verdict, highlighting that users and business partners opt for Google’s services because they deliver the best and most useful results available. Google firmly contends that Mehta was mistaken in concluding that its agreements with browser and device manufacturers to distribute search services were anti-competitive. Instead, the company argues that preference for Google’s search engine among market participants simply reflects superior service.
Additionally, Google criticizes the remedies imposed by Judge Mehta as an overreach of judicial authority, particularly the unprecedented requirement for the company to enhance its competitors by sharing data and syndicating search information. Google also objects to the order compelling data sharing with generative AI companies, pointing out that such entities were non-existent during the period under review and have achieved substantial success independently, without needing to rely on Google’s data or former market dominance.
Conversely, the U.S. government and a coalition of states involved in the lawsuit are also filing their own appeal of the decision, arguing that the court’s remedies were insufficient and should have been more extensive. Their legal position includes calling for more drastic actions, such as divesting Google’s Chrome browser, which they consider a critical platform for distributing Google search services. The government’s stance is that comprehensive reforms are essential to addressing the competitive harms caused by Google.
With approximately five years elapsed since the original case was initiated, the responsibility now falls to the federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., to determine the next steps. The legal process may continue further, potentially reaching the Supreme Court, as the case evolves through the judicial system.
