“The whole notion referring to ‘Trump’s DOJ’ seems to raise the question of how independent the DOJ is in this current administration,” said Gartner’s vice president distinguished analyst, Andrew Frank.  

There have been reports of Trump’s intervention in previous cases. In 2019, Trump reportedly tried to block the Time Warner-AT&T merger, the lawyer noted, (AT&T and Time Warner merged in 2018, but AT&T later spun off the WarnerMedia business unit),

Is Google’s engagement with the White House different?

Google is entering the second stage of the remedy phase—where the court could impose landmark changes on Google’s business.

Beyond legal maneuvering, this case underscores the delicate balancing act Google faces.

“It’s a balancing act between doing what’s right for Google’s stakeholders—handling the situation in a way that’s as beneficial to the company—versus protecting its reputation as a neutral party in any partisan conflicts,” Frank said.

Google’s recent backpedaling on its DEI initiatives is an example of how the company is adapting to these changing political dynamics, although Google is far from alone in this example.

How likely is this to tilt in Google’s favor?

While initial remedies called for the company’s breakup, the final resolution tends to be much weaker—as seen in Microsoft’s early 2000s antitrust case. Google may be positioning itself for a similar outcome, negotiating a more favorable settlement.

The lawyer suggested that the DOJ’s final proposal, expected on Friday, could be a scaled-back version of its initial demands. While a full Chrome divestiture remains a possibility, the key question is how much the DOJ will soften its remedy.

“Historically, antitrust settlements tend to weaken over time, and Google’s direct engagement with the administration signals an effort to soften the outcome,” the lawyer said.