Will the D.C. Circuit schedule oral arguments on the DOJ Chrome divestiture appeal by end of 2026?

The DOJ filed its appeal in February 2026. D.C. Circuit major antitrust appeals typically take 12-18 months from filing to oral argument. That places oral arguments in approximately Feb-Aug 2027. The question asks about scheduling (not actual hearing) by end of 2026, which is 10 months from filing. In high-profile cases, the court can set a briefing schedule within 2-3 months and schedule oral arguments 3-6 months after briefing completes. With both sides having strong incentives to expedite (DOJ to maintain momentum, Google to resolve uncertainty), a compressed timeline is plausible. However, the dual appeal structure (Google liability + DOJ remedy) may complicate scheduling. Setting at 42% — plausible but not the base case timeline.

Appellate procedure typically involves: (1) briefing schedule set (~2 months after filing), (2) appellant brief (~3 months), (3) appellee brief (~2 months), (4) reply brief (~1 month), (5) scheduling of oral arguments (~2-3 months after briefing complete). Total: ~10-11 months minimum for standard timeline. This barely fits within the 2026 calendar year if everything moves on the fast end. But major antitrust cases often involve extensive briefing with amicus filings, potential consolidation motions, and the complexity of both sides appealing different aspects. Slightly below 40% — possible but more likely the oral argument scheduling pushes into Q1 2027.

The political salience of this case matters. The DOJ under the current administration has been aggressive on tech antitrust. The D.C. Circuit is aware of public interest in tech competition cases. Expedition motions are available and the court may be receptive given the case's significance. Additionally, the trial court's 6-year behavioral remedy term creates a timeline pressure — the appellate court needs to rule while the remedy framework is still operative. This argues for faster-than-standard scheduling. Setting at 45% — accounting for political and institutional pressures toward expedition, but acknowledging standard procedure timelines.

The question is about scheduling oral arguments, not the arguments themselves. Scheduling can happen 2-3 months before the actual hearing. So the court would need to set a date by roughly October-November 2026, with the hearing potentially in early 2027. This is feasible if briefing completes by August 2026. Feb 2026 filing → May 2026 opening brief → July 2026 response brief → Aug 2026 reply → Oct-Nov scheduling. Tight but doable. Setting at 40%.

I think the standard timeline is more likely to prevail. D.C. Circuit handles complex regulatory and antitrust cases regularly and doesn't typically expedite without extraordinary circumstances. The dual appeal adds complexity — the court may prefer to resolve consolidation questions before scheduling. Extensions on briefing deadlines are common, especially in cases of this magnitude with high-quality appellate counsel on both sides. Setting at 35% — below center because standard procedure more likely than expedition.

This is genuinely uncertain — a legal/procedural prediction rather than a financial one. The analysis has limited value here beyond establishing that the appeal was filed in Feb 2026. What matters is appellate court scheduling practices, which are somewhat predictable but vary. The D.C. Circuit's recent track record on tech cases suggests moderate pace. I note that the question's resolution is about scheduling, which can happen quickly once briefing completes. If the court moves at a normal pace on briefing, the scheduling of oral arguments by December 2026 is a near coin-flip. Setting at 43%.

Feb 2026 filing. Standard 12-18 month timeline. Question asks about scheduling by Dec 2026 — 10 months. Possible but not base case. Setting at 38%.

Standard appellate timelines don't favor scheduling within 10 months. Major antitrust cases take longer. Briefing extensions likely. Setting at 33%.

High-profile case may get expedited. Scheduling (not hearing) is the threshold. Political pressure on court. Could happen by Dec 2026. Setting at 42% — genuinely uncertain.