Suspense crime, Digital Desk : US District Judge Amit Mehta sits in the crosshairs of major US regulation technology, particularly due to his landmark antitrust case against Google. His actions could permanently transform the controlling frameworks over the Google search engine, web browsers, and even AI powered systems.

For worry of Google, the world is monitoring the result for Judge Amit Mehta’s decisions since they will determine the boundaries of accountability imposed over Big Tech companies on the long term.”

Who Is Judge Amit Mehta?

In 1971, Mehta was born in Patan in the Gujarat state of India. He moved to the United States as an infant. He completed Political Science and Economics at Georgetown University. Later on, he pursued a Juris Doctor degree from University of Virginia School of Law and graduated in 1997.

Judicial positions are usually preceded with remarkable positions in law firms which are difficult to come by and Mehta is no different in that regard. He worked for Latham & Watkins and later Zuckerman Spaeder LLP with clients like ex-IMF head Dominique Strauss-Kahn.

In 2014, he was appointed by Obama to the US District Court for the District of Columbia. Since then, he is well known for his reasonable judicial decisions and entertaining opinions sprinkled with pop culture references. Beyoncé and Jay-Z are among the few honored with such recognition.

His infamy most recently stems from not dismissing civil cases Trump faced relating to the Capitol riot on January 6. He claimed that Trump’s conduct as a president did not, and legally could not, constitute the exercise of presidential immunity.

The Antitrust Case Against Google

The case focuses on whether Google has crossed the line with its control of the digital market for searching and technologies. Mehta, in August of 2024:

“Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly.”

This finding opens the door to possibilities of deciding much more extreme and systemic measures that could impact the use of Google Chrome, AI systems, and even the overarching strategies used to dominate search supremacy. One suggestion that was posed during the trial was that of selling off the Chrome browser subsystem, a proposal that drew considerable doubt from Mehta, who directly questioned Google’s legal team on it.

Selling off Chrome: A Real Possibility?

Judge Mehta asked the question framed as a suggestion regarding removing Google Chrome from the holding company and treating it as a cell in a prison of its own. Google’s lawyer, John Schmidtlein, forcefully rejected the idea. He explained that the practicality of that would be almost non-existent as he opined the hypothetical purchaser would likely be some sort of bottom-tier option who would only destroy resources for the brand in the name of “innovation.”

Nonetheless, the mere reason as to why Mehta lifted up Chrome’s divestment shows how serious the court could be exploring radical structural remedies – ones that might change Google’s business logic for good.

Implications for AI and Tech Governance

Outside of Chrome, the case also discusses the way Google makes use of its AI systems to proffering anticompetitive supremacy. With AI at the center of the company’s product ecosystem, Mehta’s ruling could guide how these technologies are developed, leveraged, and controlled.

The result will almost certainly determine the approach for other emerging technologies and further decide the benchmark for tech monopoly behavior evaluation.

Read More: Judge Amit Mehta: The Indian-Origin Jurist at the Center of the Landmark Antitrust Case Against Google