In a new court filing, the Department of Justice is considering the most extreme measure at its disposal in its antitrust case against Google, saying it may pursue a breakup of the company.

Judge Amit P. Mehta ruled Google was an illegal monopoly in August 2024, dealing the company the worst legal blow it has suffered in its history. There are a slew of possible remedies the government may pursue in its efforts to reign Google in, including prohibiting it from entering into exclusionary search deals, forcing it to share data with competitors, and restrict its ability to incorporate AI in its search business. The most extreme option, however, is a complete breakup of the company, forcing it to sell of parts that contribute to Google’s control of the search industry, most notably Android, Chrome, and its advertising business.

In a court filing (courtesy of Vox), the DOJ makes clear it is considering asking the court to do just that, along with a number of other possible remedies.

Accordingly, Plaintiffs are considering remedies that would limit or end Google’s use of contracts, monopoly profits, and other tools to control or influence longstanding and emerging distribution channels and search-related products (e.g., browsers, search apps, artificial intelligence summaries and agents). For example, Plaintiffs are evaluating remedies that would, among other things, limit or prohibit default agreements, preinstallation agreements, and other revenue-sharing arrangements related to search and search-related products, potentially with or without the use ofa choice screen.

Similarly, Plaintiffs are considering behavioral and structural remedies that would prevent Google from using products such as Chrome, Play, and Android to advantage Google search and Google search-related products and features—including emerging search access points and features, such as artificial intelligence—overrivals or new entrants. Such consideration is faithful to the Court’s findings. As the Court recognized, Google’s longstanding control of the Chrome browser, with its preinstalled Google search default, “significantly narrows the available channelsofdistribution and thus disincentivizes the emergenceof new competition.” Mem. Op. at 159. “[T]he Google Play Store is a must-have on all Android devices,” id. at 210; and the Android Agreements are, of course,a ertical tool for Google’s anticompetitive limitations on distribution.

The key words in those paragraphs are “considering behavioral and structural remedies…” That statement makes clear that the DOJ is considering asking for a breakup of the company.

The Google antitrust case is the single biggest case since the US government sued Microsoft decades ago. In many ways, the case against Google is even more high-stakes, given how ubiquitous the company’s products—especially search—are to people around the world.

If the DOJ pushes for a breakup, and Judge Mehta agrees with the recommendation, the result could be a fundamental change to the very nature of search and the internet.