On 5 August 2024, Judge Amit Mehta of the US District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that, among other things, Google, LLC, a subsidiary of Alphabet Inc, "is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly" with regard to web searching in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act (AP, US v. Google - Memorandum Opinion 5 August 2024). The next stage of the litigation is the remedies trial, where the plaintiffs will request actions by the court they think are necessary to address the finding that Google is a monopoly (The Verge, Newsweek). As of the launch of this question, the Justice Department was asking the court to impose structural remedies, such as breaking the company up into two or more firms and/or forcing Google to divest some of its business lines or products (e.g., Chrome web browser, Android operating system) (AP, US v. Google - Plantiffs' Initial Proposed Final Judgment 20 November 2024). The outcome will be determined based on final judgments and orders entered by the court and open-source reporting on actions. Any subsequent appeals are immaterial. A judgment or order including only structural relief contingent upon future events and findings alone will not count (e.g., US v. Google - Plantiffs' Initial Proposed Final Judgment 20 November 2024, see Section V(D) on page 11). For an historic example, see the order and final judgment from trial court in US v. Microsoft, in which the judge ordered a structural reorganization (i.e., a breakup), which was later reversed on appeal (US v. Microsoft - Memorandum and Order 7 June 2000, Politico). 

Confused? Check our FAQ or ask us for help. To learn more about Good Judgment and Superforecasting, click here.

To learn more about how you can become a Superforecaster, see here. For other posts from our Insights blog, click here.