Google is facing political opposition over a new policy integrating artificial intelligence into its education services, after reports that schools rejecting AI could lose access to parts of its search offering triggered accusations that the company was using its market position to pressure public education systems.
The controversy followed a Google blog post titled “Designing responsible AI for learning,” in which the company outlined plans to introduce Guided Learning, an AI-powered feature within Google Classroom designed to help students work through academic problems rather than simply provide answers.
A report by The New York Times said Google’s policy would result in schools that reject AI entirely losing access to search. The report prompted criticism from prominent US politicians, including Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont and New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani.
Register for the next Tekedia Mini-MBA.
Register for Tekedia AI in Business Masterclass.
Join Tekedia Capital Syndicate and co-invest in great global startups.
“Google is trying to use its monopoly power to force AI into our public schools,” Mamdani wrote on X.
Sanders accused the company of threatening schools, describing the policy as “extortion.”
The reaction placed Google at the center of a wider debate about whether technology companies should be able to make access to widely used digital services conditional on schools adopting new AI tools. It also raised questions about the influence of large technology platforms over how students access information and how public institutions manage emerging technologies.
Google responded to the criticism on Tuesday, arguing that its policy was intended to give schools greater control over how students use artificial intelligence.
In a post on X, the company said Gemini, Gemini Notebook and AI-powered search features would remain switched off by default for schools. Administrators would decide whether to activate the tools, according to the company’s explanation.
“We are also updating Search for schools to make it better for learning,” Google wrote. “Specifically, AI Mode and AI Overviews will offer step-by-step guided learning through problems, so that students don’t get quick answers to schoolwork.”
The response did not directly address the major allegation in the Times report: whether schools that refuse to adopt AI would retain unrestricted access to conventional search services.
Chris Phillips, Google’s vice president for education, told the newspaper that “Search and AI are deeply integrated,” suggesting that separating the company’s search products from its AI capabilities could be difficult as the technology becomes more embedded in its services.
Google’s education platform is widely used by schools for classroom management, communication and access to digital learning resources. If conventional search functionality becomes increasingly dependent on AI features, schools seeking to restrict AI exposure may have fewer options to maintain existing arrangements.
Google’s position that AI tools are disabled by default addresses the question of administrative control, but it does not fully settle concerns about whether schools can opt out without losing access to other services.
Antitrust Concerns Extend Beyond Education
The dispute has also revived scrutiny of Google’s market power. The company has lost major antitrust cases involving its search and advertising businesses, putting its commercial practices under sustained examination by US regulators and lawmakers.
Former Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan, who pursued antitrust action against major technology companies including Google, Meta and Amazon, joined the criticism on Tuesday.
Khan said the new policy demonstrated “the danger of allowing an unregulated monopolist to control an essential service.”
The concern is that a company with a dominant position in a core digital service may have the ability to shape how institutions adopt related products. In Google’s case, the integration of AI into search and education tools creates a potential conflict between its commercial push to expand AI use and schools’ responsibility to determine what technology is appropriate for students.
The controversy comes as governments, educators, and parents face growing pressure to establish safeguards around children’s exposure to artificial intelligence. Questions include how AI-generated information is presented, whether students become overly dependent on automated assistance, and how schools can assess learning when digital tools increasingly perform tasks previously completed independently.
Google’s Guided Learning initiative is designed to address part of that concern by providing step-by-step assistance rather than simply delivering answers.
The latest dispute adds to a series of controversies involving the effects of digital platforms and AI products on young users.
In August, Meta reached a $16.7 billion settlement in its child safety trial after several state attorneys general accused the company of misrepresenting the extent of mental health harms associated with platforms including Facebook and Instagram.
OpenAI also introduced ChatGPT for Teens in August, following increased scrutiny of its safety practices by state authorities. Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier, a Republican, had filed a lawsuit against the company in June as part of the wider examination of AI-related risks to young people.
Google has faced additional scrutiny over its own search products. Nonprofit organization Common Sense Media recently assigned the company’s AI Overviews an “unacceptable risk” rating. Last month, Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut and Republican Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri launched an inquiry into Google’s efforts to introduce AI into classrooms.
Google first introduced AI Overviews as a search feature in May 2024, placing AI-generated summaries at the top of search results for many queries. Its expansion into education now raises a more specific question: can schools continue using established search services while restricting students’ access to AI-generated responses?
For Google, the dispute has created a difficult balance between expanding AI across its products and maintaining the confidence of institutions that depend on its services. The company is presenting Guided Learning as a way to improve education through structured assistance, but the backlash shows that schools and policymakers are also concerned about control, choice, and the market power behind the technology.