The aggressive campaign by U.S. antitrust authorities to dismantle the power of Silicon Valley's largest corporations is faltering, following a series of significant legal defeats in 2025. Judges have shown a marked reluctance to order the breakup of tech behemoths like Google and Meta, casting serious doubt on the government's primary strategy for curbing their dominance.
Judicial Hurdles Block Path to Breakups
Federal enforcers, who launched this historic challenge during the first Trump administration and saw it expand under President Joe Biden, have struggled over the past year. Their goal was to convince courts to force tech groups to spin off major parts of their empires. Key requests included separating Google's Chrome browser and its Android operating system, as well as unwinding Meta's acquisition of the social media platform Instagram.
While prosecutors secured some landmark rulings—notably a finding by Judge Amit Mehta in August that Google maintained an illegal monopoly in internet search through exclusive deals—the victory was partial. In a crucial September decision, Judge Mehta declined the Department of Justice's request for a drastic remedy, refusing to order the divestiture of Chrome or Android. This pattern has repeated: judges acknowledge monopolistic behavior but stop short of imposing the most severe structural changes, especially when dealing with acquisitions that happened years ago.
Jonathan Kanter, the former head of the antitrust division at the DOJ under Biden, expressed his disappointment, stating the rulings highlight a failure to act "in real time." "There’s an important lesson here, which is not to let the monopolies form or maintain themselves illegally in the first place," Kanter added.
Implications for Pending Cases and Tech Lobbying
These setbacks arrive at a critical juncture, with major monopoly cases still pending against Apple and Amazon. The judicial hesitancy now calls into question the entire legal approach to taming the power of these integrated giants. The final outcomes remain years away, as lengthy appeals are expected to unfold.
However, the recent rulings have created a new political opening. Tech executives, such as Meta's Mark Zuckerberg, who have cultivated relationships with the Trump administration, are now poised to intensify their lobbying efforts. Their goal is to push for a broad retreat from the aggressive antitrust enforcement that has defined recent years.
The Challenge of a Fast-Moving Industry
Legal experts point to the unique challenges of regulating technology markets. Michael Carrier, a professor at Rutgers Law School, noted that the government faces an "uphill climb," partly due to the rapid pace of innovation. "The fast-changing nature of these markets — which is especially the case given recent improvements in artificial intelligence — raises hurdles for antitrust watchdogs," Carrier explained. This argument, often presented by the tech companies themselves, appears to resonate with judges who are wary of mandating corporate splits in such a dynamic environment.
The battle over the future of Big Tech in America is far from over, but the momentum has shifted. Antitrust enforcers must now grapple with a judiciary that is willing to condemn anti-competitive conduct but remains deeply skeptical of wielding its most powerful tool: the order to break up a company.
