Google Chrome Faces Possible Sale as DOJ Pushes to Break Tech Giant’s AI Grip

In one of the most high-stakes antitrust battles in modern tech history, Google’s dominance over internet search and artificial intelligence is being fiercely contested in U.S. federal court. As the closing arguments unfold, the U.S. Justice Department is urging the court to impose historic penalties—including the forced sale of Google Chrome, the world’s most used browser, in an effort to curb what it describes as an illegal monopoly.

This marks the final phase of a case that began in 2020 and escalated when Judge Amit Mehta ruled last year that Google’s search engine operates as an illegal monopoly. Now, the legal spotlight turns to how exactly Google should be punished—and the government’s demands are nothing short of transformative.

At the center of the DOJ’s argument is a call to ban Google from paying tech companies like Apple and Samsung to make its search engine the default on their devices. They argue that these deals—reportedly worth over $20 billion annually to Apple alone—are part of a carefully constructed system that has allowed Google to entrench itself at the heart of the digital economy.

But it’s the proposed divestiture of Chrome that has everyone’s attention. The DOJ claims that Google’s control over Chrome gives it unfair access to browser traffic and user data, which could further cement its place at the top of the AI food chain. Tech rivals like OpenAI and Perplexity—who testified in court—have already expressed interest in acquiring Chrome if it were ever up for sale.

Google, on the other hand, is pushing back hard. Company executives warn that selling off Chrome would destroy its functionality, expose users to security risks, and ultimately harm consumers. Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google’s VP of Regulatory Affairs, blasted the DOJ’s proposals in a recent blog post, calling them “extreme” and arguing they would only help “well-funded competitors who want shortcuts to Google’s technology.”

Google CEO Sundar Pichai has emphasized that AI innovation is already reshaping the search landscape, citing that users now have alternatives like OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Perplexity’s conversational models. According to Google, this evolution should be seen as proof that the market is dynamic—not monopolistic.

But the DOJ isn’t convinced. They insist that Google’s stranglehold on distribution channels is freezing competition, especially for emerging AI and ad-tech firms. They’re demanding that Google be forced to license its search index and query data to competitors—something the tech giant fiercely opposes, citing privacy and security concerns.

The tech world is deeply divided over what should happen next.

Apple filed court documents opposing the DOJ’s proposal, saying it would harm its business model and have no meaningful effect on Google’s user base. Legal scholars and former FTC officials argue that forced divestiture of Chrome is “excessive government interference.” Meanwhile, Y Combinator, the legendary startup incubator, supports the DOJ’s vision, claiming that Google’s market grip has created a “kill zone” that scares away innovation and venture capital.

The App Association, representing small software developers, also warned that breaking up Google could destabilize the tech ecosystem, making it harder for startups to plan for the future or even get acquired—a vital part of many entrepreneurial roadmaps.

Judge Mehta is expected to issue a ruling by Labor Day, after which Google plans to appeal any unfavorable outcome. Regardless of the decision, it’s clear that the verdict will shape not only the future of Google but the entire landscape of digital innovation, privacy, and competition in an AI-driven world.