US District Judge Leonie Brinkema in Alexandria, Virginia, ruled Wednesday that Alphabet Inc.'s Google doesn't have to sell off its advertising exchange, instead ordering proposed behavioral changes to the company's ad tech business. According to CNBC TV18, the federal judge issued her decision under seal, accompanied by a short order rejecting the Justice Department's bid to force a sale of Google's AdX. The judge ordered proposed behavioral changes to Google's business without describing what those are specifically, with the redacted decision to be issued later this month. The DOJ had argued that Google cannot be trusted to run AdX given its past behavior, while Google contended that a forced sale would be technically difficult and result in a painful transition harming customers. As reported by CNBC TV18, the ruling allows Google to avoid a second bid to force a breakup, following a similar decision in the Justice Department's first antitrust case over its monopoly in the online search market. The judge ordered the parties to meet, confer and file a joint final judgment proposal within 30 days reflecting the opinion, with Brinkema sealing much of the order for 14 days to enable the parties to view and move for redactions if necessary.
Google shares were up less than 1% at $338.3 at 1:24 p.m. in New York following the court ruling, according to CNBC TV18. The decision represents a significant development for the tech giant, which avoided a breakup in the Justice Department's first antitrust case over its monopoly in the online search market. The ruling is the third time in a row that a judge has rejected a bid by U.S. antitrust enforcers to break up Big Tech, following previous rejections of attempts to force Meta Platforms to sell Instagram and WhatsApp, and another judge's rejection of the DOJ's bid to make Google sell its Chrome browser. Google welcomed the court decision, with executive Lee-Anne Mulholland stating the company was "very pleased the Court rejected the DOJ's proposal to break apart tools that help small businesses reach new customers and grow." The DOJ responded that it was "pleased that the court ordered substantial relief" and is "one step closer to restoring competition and bringing relief for the American people in online advertising markets," with Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward stating the department will continue to fight for fair competition. The Justice Department could still appeal the ruling, and Google continues to face scrutiny from state attorneys general, private plaintiffs and European regulators over its advertising practices.
Google's ad tech stack sits between publishers selling display space and advertisers bidding on it, giving the company a powerful position in how prices are set and which ads appear. According to CNBC TV18, Ad Manager represented 4.1% of Google's overall revenue and 1.5% of operating profit in 2020, according to Wedbush research and analysis of court documents. The Justice Department sued Google in 2023 in a second antitrust complaint, accusing the company of illegally monopolizing several areas of the advertising technology used to buy, sell and serve online display ads that appear on many websites. Companies spend more than $919 billion globally on digital advertising, according to estimates by research firm EMarketer, making the industry one of the largest segments of the broader tech economy. Google's US ad operations alone are expected to bring in $101.2 billion in 2026, with most of that coming from search ads — roughly $83.8 billion — while about $17.4 billion stems from display advertising, the segment at the center of the government's case. Regulators have long argued that controlling both the dominant publisher ad server and one of the largest ad exchanges allowed Google to advantage its own systems at multiple points in the process.
This decision represents the third time in a row that a judge has rejected a bid by U.S. antitrust enforcers to break up Big Tech in a crackdown that started during President Donald Trump's first term. As reported by CNBC TV18, a federal judge in Washington last year rejected the Federal Trade Commission's attempt to make Meta Platforms sell off Instagram and WhatsApp, saying the agency failed to prove that Meta holds a monopoly in a social media landscape that has shifted drastically since the case was brought in 2020. The ruling is likely to fuel questions about whether courts are up to the task of checking the industry's unprecedented power over the U.S. economy. Cases against Amazon and Apple involving massive smartphone and online retail markets will not go to trial until 2027 at the earliest. Likewise, another judge in Washington, who previously ruled that Google holds an illegal monopoly in online search, rejected the DOJ's bid to make the company sell its Chrome browser, citing rising competition from generative artificial intelligence companies such as OpenAI's ChatGPT. Advocacy group The Tech Oversight Project said the rulings "prove that the courts alone will not save us from Big Tech," with the group proposing legislation aimed at restoring competition in digital advertising. Sacha Haworth, executive director of The Tech Oversight Project, condemned Brinkema's ruling, stating "We should be denying monopolists the ill-gotten fruits of their monopolies, not rewarding them." The pace and scope of Google's implementation will likely determine whether the remedy produces meaningful competitive shifts in the display ad market.
