Google Search Is Great for Consumers. A Judge’s Monopoly Ruling Could Ruin It

A federal district judge’s recent ruling to apply an “illegal monopoly” label to Google’s search engine is a bureaucratic and judicial overreach that sets a dangerous precedent for free enterprise and innovation across all sectors of the economy. It will also hurt consumers and Google’s partners.

It is not our government’s role to dictate consumer choices or pick winners and losers, especially when allegations of wrongdoing come from business competitors rather than individuals. As the case enters the remedies phase, the Justice Department could soon take action to break up and split up the company for the first time since AT&T in the 1980s — an extreme stance, even for the Biden-Harris administration and Federal Trade Commission Chairwoman Lina Khan.

Competition policy works best when it puts consumers and innovation first, not when it demonizes the size of companies for its own benefit. Judge Amit Mehta’s decision in US et al. v. Google is a step toward the outdated notion that “big is inherently bad,” a mindset that American jurisprudence moved away from decades ago.

Although Mehta stated that Google “has long been the best search engine” and that “competitors have not succeeded because they were inferior,” he concluded that the company engaged in anticompetitive conduct solely because of its successful results. He did not explicitly point to illegal or exclusionary conduct.

This heavy-handed approach has historically proven to be detrimental to consumers and merely represents a political victory for an active federal government and Google’s competitors who simply failed to keep up with the market.

Simply put, the view ignores the emerging disruption and innovation of generative AI for online consumer search and choice. From education and finance to healthcare and e-commerce, these new technologies are driving new elements of competition and innovation, benefiting consumers.

The truth is that there is more competition in the search engine market than ever; people can ask for recommendations on Reddit, find new music on Spotify, ask ChatGPT to summarize a long document, or shop on the seemingly endless e-commerce sites across the internet.

By focusing on the size of companies, we risk returning to flawed public policy that is driven by attempts to gain political popularity rather than strict compliance with the strict requirements of U.S. antitrust laws.

Consider for a moment Europe’s recent adoption of the big-is-bad online mentality. In just three months of the Digital Markets Act, or DMA, regulatory turmoil has drastically curbed innovation and investment in early-stage technology. The DMA is laser-focused on regulating American tech companies, forcing companies like Apple, Alphabet, and Meta to back away from new product launches because of the punitive measures that come with being particularly good at what they do.

And it’s not just innovators who are being hobbled. Consumers abroad are also bearing the brunt of the EU’s battle with big tech. The same features and services that once made their lives easier, more connected, and more efficient are now being squeezed by Eurocrats. Sites and apps that once helped people find what they needed quickly and easily are now burdened with restrictions that do nothing but frustrate users.

Internet companies in Europe are no longer thinking about how to push the boundaries or deliver the next big idea – they are too busy trying to avoid stepping on regulatory landmines. This is what happens when government overreach trumps consumer choice and market-driven progress.

This political season, both major parties should think twice before following Europe’s example of encouraging executive agencies to pick winners and losers in order to win new voter support. If we continue on this path of punishing and threatening to break up successful companies in industries from transportation to energy, there is no doubt that the United States will fall behind in the global innovation race and cede even more technological ground to our adversaries.

George P. Bush served as Texas Land Commissioner from 2015 to 2023.