Google has won a major reprieve in one of the most closely watched antitrust cases of the decade. A US court has ruled that the tech giant will not have to sell off its Chrome browser, despite being found guilty of illegally maintaining its monopoly in online search. The decision, delivered by Judge Amit Mehta, spares Google from the most drastic penalties but imposes restrictions aimed at checking its power in an industry that is rapidly shifting toward AI-driven tools.

Chrome stays with Google

On Tuesday, Judge Mehta rejected federal prosecutors’ demand to strip Google of its core search business and ban the company from the browser market for five years. He said prosecutors had “overreached in seeking forced divesture of these key assets.” This means Chrome — considered Google’s crown jewel — remains firmly in the company’s hands, preserving one of its most valuable products.

New limits on exclusivity

While avoiding a breakup, Google will now face curbs on some of its long-standing business practices. The court barred the company from entering or maintaining exclusive distribution deals for Chrome, Google Assistant, and its Gemini app. However, Mehta allowed Google to continue making payments to device makers for product placement, cautioning that a total ban could cause “downstream harms.”

Investors breathe a sigh of relief

Wall Street reacted swiftly to the ruling. Google’s parent company, Alphabet, saw its shares jump in after-hours trading, a clear sign that investors viewed the judgment as far more lenient than feared. For Google, the verdict preserves both its core search business and the broader advertising model that underpins much of its revenue.

Criticism from watchdogs

Not everyone was satisfied with the outcome. Consumer advocates and watchdog groups blasted the ruling as toothless. The American Economic Liberties Project called it a “complete failure.” Its executive director, Nidhi Hegde, did not hold back: “You don’t find someone guilty of robbing a bank and then sentence him to writing a thank you note for the loot. Similarly, you don’t find Google liable for monopolisation and then write a remedy that lets it protect its monopoly.”

A shifting battleground

During the trial, prosecutors revealed that Google spent billions to ensure its search engine remained the default on Apple and Samsung devices. That strategy helped the company capture nearly 90 percent of the US search market. While Google argued that its dominance came from offering a superior product, Judge Mehta ruled last year: “Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly.”

In his latest decision, however, Mehta acknowledged that the landscape is evolving quickly with AI-powered search engines and chatbots entering the fray. He stressed that remedies must prevent Google from simply transferring its dominance into emerging AI technologies.

Looking ahead, Google’s regulatory troubles are far from over. Later this year, the company will face another legal battle — this time over its control of online advertising technology. Together, these rulings are set to shape not just Google’s future, but also the broader contours of competition in the digital economy.