The court rejected a Google breakup. Now it must protect privacy and America’s edge

• Ken Strachan says forcing Google to share sensitive search records would make consumers less safe and wreak havoc on our small businesses.

In the latest chapter of the Google search case, the court rejected the harshest breakup proposals and instead imposed narrower limits and some data sharing. I welcome the court’s decision to turn away from a forced split of Chrome and Android; dismembering the tools people use every day would have raised costs, slowed updates and weakened security for families and small businesses here in North Carrolton and across America.

But the ruling also orders Google to share portions of its search data with rivals and restricts aspects of how and where it can operate. Here, too, caution is essential. Search queries are among the most sensitive digital footprints net users have. They can include symptoms before a doctor’s visit, financial research and sensitive communications. With each time that data is copied and moved to new hands, the more opportunities for mistakes, breaches, or misuse grow.

A chilling effect on the productivity made possible by this technology is something neither Mississippi nor America can afford. More than 159,000 businesses in our state use Google tools to reach customers, process orders and manage operations. They depend on reliable, secure software that can safeguard against records being routed to firms with less mature security or to vendors with overseas exposure. If this happens Americans’ privacy takes the hit. Such forced sharing of sensitive search records would make consumers less safe and wreak havoc on our small businesses.

In addition to real, immediate privacy concerns, there is also a larger strategic dimension we cannot ignore. America is in a real contest with China across the fields of artificial intelligence and other critical technologies. Our advantage comes from innovation at scale. Large companies fund the research, security improvements and infrastructure that smaller firms rely on to innovate and be dynamic. If we weaken our innovation edge with remedies that drain resources or fragment systems, we erode the capacity that keeps the country in front. That affects where data centers are built, where high-skill jobs land and where breakthroughs happen.

Consumer welfare must remain the standard. If a proposed remedy raises prices, slows product improvements, or increases the chance that sensitive information leaks, it fails that test. The better path is to let competition in a fast-moving market do its work while setting boundaries that keep people safe. Generative AI has already injected real rivalry into how people find information, with new services and interfaces competing on speed, accuracy and customizability. Policy should respect that dynamism, while always prioritizing the protection of privacy and security.

Given what is at stake, it is simply time for DOJ to move on. Ultimately, this will protect the privacy of every American and Mississippian, keep the technology that powers our economy strong and make sure America retains its edge over China in the fields that will define this century.