Sources: DOJ began work on a possible Google antitrust investigation after brokering a deal with FTC, which considered and opted not to pursue the case in 2013
A possible probe could open a new chapter in the tech giant's troubles with regulators around the world who contend that the company is too large
Context & Ripple Effects
This story is the opening move of what became a five-year federal case against Google. The Washington Post report reveals the handoff mechanics: the DOJ picked up work on a possible investigation only after brokering jurisdiction with the FTC, which had weighed and declined to bring an antitrust case back in 2013 — a six-year gap between the agency's first look and its second.
Days earlier, the Wall Street Journal reported the DOJ was preparing an antitrust investigation into Google's search practices, and by September Google confirmed receiving a civil-investigative demand for records tied to prior probes. The arc runs through the DOJ and state AGs' consideration of forcing divestitures of Chrome and ad assets in 2020 to the post-ruling remedies debate in 2024, when the DOJ weighed a breakup or data-sharing mandates after the Google monopoly ruling.
First-order effects
- Google becomes the target of a formal DOJ workstream spanning search and other businesses, ending the practical immunity that followed the FTC's 2013 decision not to sue.
- Jurisdiction over Big Tech antitrust enforcement consolidates at the DOJ via the FTC deal, setting which agency's legal theory — and staff — shapes the case.
Second-order effects
- State attorneys general join the federal effort rather than filing parallel suits, widening the discovery burden on Google across multiple jurisdictions at once.
- Rivals and complainants in search and advertising gain a live enforcement channel after 2013's closed door, reshaping what grievances get escalated to regulators.
Third-order effects
- If the pattern holds, the 2013 non-decision becomes the exception rather than the rule: platform-scale conduct cases move from episodic agency review toward sustained multi-year structural remedies, up to forced divestitures and mandated data sharing.
The trend: US antitrust enforcement is shifting from one-off reviews of big tech platforms to persistent, multi-agency campaigns aimed at structural remedies.