Ohio Appeals Court Rules Google Is Not a Common Carrier
Ohio's Court of Appeals ruled Google is not a common carrier under state law.
Why it matters: This ruling clarifies Google's legal status, affecting how regulators approach tech giants’ platform liability and editorial control. It influences ongoing debates on whether internet platforms should be regulated like utilities or protected as expressive services.
- June 8, 2026: Ohio Court of Appeals upheld that Google is not a common carrier under Ohio law.
- The case arose from a 2021 lawsuit by Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost targeting Google’s search practices.
- Court held Google’s search engine exercises editorial discretion, creating a curated and synthesized product, not simply transmitting information.
- Ruling highlighted First Amendment concerns about regulating Google's editorial judgments in search results.
On June 8, 2026, the Ohio Court of Appeals, Fifth Appellate District, affirmed a lower court’s decision that Google does not qualify as a common carrier under Ohio law. The case, State ex rel. Yost v. Google, L.L.C., began in 2021 when Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost filed suit seeking this designation, alleging that Google prioritized its own products in search results and disadvantaged competitors.
Judge Andrew J. King, presiding, wrote that Google “does not transport the unaltered property of others.” Instead, it “creates a new expressive product,” the search results page (SRP), by “discretionary crawling, indexing, ranking, filtering, and formatting.” He emphasized this is a form of curation and synthesis rather than mere carriage of information.
The court rejected the idea that common carrier principles apply to Google's search engine, noting such a classification would infringe on First Amendment rights by regulating editorial content. The ruling clarified that Google’s business model and services involve significant editorial judgment, which the law protects from compelled regulation.
The lawsuit referenced data indicating approximately 65% of searches end without a click to a different company, highlighting concerns over Google's market influence. Nonetheless, the court concluded that the core dispute is about regulating Google's speech and editorial choices, not typical common carrier functions.
This decision influences legal frameworks governing digital platforms and contributes to the broader debate over how internet intermediaries should be regulated amid growing scrutiny of their role and responsibilities.
For more on the court’s detailed opinion, visit Justia. Additional legal analysis is available at Law360 and MediaPost.
By the numbers:
- June 8, 2026 — Date of appellate ruling affirming Google’s non-common carrier status
- June 8, 2021 — Date Ohio Attorney General filed initial lawsuit
- 65% — Percentage of Google searches ending without clicks to other companies as cited in litigation
Yes, but: While the ruling is a setback for regulators seeking to treat Google like a common carrier, potential appeals or alternative regulatory approaches remain possible.
What's next: Ohio Attorney General's office may consider appealing to the Ohio Supreme Court; the decision could influence similar cases nationwide.