"DOJ had a chance to propose remedies related to the issue in this case: search distribution agreements with Apple, Mozilla, smartphone OEMs and wireless carriers," the post said. "Instead, DOJ chose to push a radical interventionist agenda that would harm Americans and America's global technology leadership. DOJ's wildly overbroad proposal goes miles beyond the court's decision. It would break a range of Google products -- even beyond Search -- that people love and find helpful in their everyday lives."

In a court filing Wednesday (Nov. 20), the government said forcing Google to sell Chrome would make for a more equitable search engine market.

Selling, the filing said, "will permanently stop Google's control of this critical search access point and allow rival search engines the ability to access the browser that for many users is a gateway to the internet."

Google argued in the blog post that the proposal would undermine the quality of its products and bring about "government micromanagement of Google Search" by appointing a "Technical Committee."

"As just one example, DOJ's proposal would literally require us to install not one but two separate choice screens before you could access Google Search on a Pixel phone you bought," the post said. "And the design of those choice screens would have to be approved by the Technical Committee. And that's just a small part of it. We wish we were making this up."

A federal court ruled in August that Google has a monopoly on the search market, following a 2020 antitrust suit by the DOJ. The department said in October it was weighing a breakup of Google's businesses that could include splitting off its Chrome, Play or Android units.