Google has appealed Judge Mehta's search monopoly ruling to the D.C. Circuit; the DOJ cross-appealed seeking Chrome divestiture, with oral argument expected in late 2026.
Google LLC filed its appeal of U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta's August 2024 liability finding, which held that the company had illegally monopolized the general search market, with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit on May 22, 2026 [1]. Google argues that Judge Mehta improperly applied antitrust law and committed a fundamental legal error in concluding that the company's distribution agreements with device manufacturers and browser developers constituted unlawful monopoly maintenance [1]. The filing initiates what is expected to be a lengthy appellate proceeding over the most consequential U.S. antitrust ruling in the internet era [2].
The appeal arises from proceedings in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, where Judge Mehta issued the liability ruling in August 2024 following a bench trial, then entered a remedies order in September 2025 [1]. The remedies order directed Google to share proprietary search data with rivals and imposed a suite of behavioral restrictions on how the company operates its search distribution business [1]. The U.S. Department of Justice, led by Antitrust Division chief Abigail Slater, filed a cross-appeal, asking the D.C. Circuit to revisit whether Judge Mehta should have ordered the divestiture of Google's Chrome browser, a structural remedy the DOJ had sought but the district court declined to impose [1] [2].
The substantive stakes extend well beyond Google's market position. The D.C. Circuit must determine whether behavioral remedies of this scope, principally mandated data-sharing obligations directed at a dominant technology platform, can withstand appellate scrutiny under existing antitrust doctrine [2]. The outcome will also shape how courts and regulators approach competition in artificial intelligence, where access to large-scale search data is increasingly central to building and training AI systems [2]. A ruling narrowing the district court's remedial authority could limit the government's toolkit in future platform monopoly cases.
Oral argument before the D.C. Circuit is expected no earlier than late 2026, with a decision potentially extending into 2027 [1]. Both parties are likely to submit extensive briefing on the standard of review applicable to the liability finding and the legal framework governing the court's remedial discretion. Given the case's complexity and the government's cross-appeal, the panel may consolidate argument on both the liability and remedies questions. A petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court remains a plausible subsequent step regardless of which party prevails at the circuit level.