US judge rejects federal bid to force sale of Google advertising exchange
A federal judge in Virginia declined to force Google to sell its AdX exchange, imposing behavioral remedies instead of a structural breakup sought by the US Department of Justice.
Federal court rejects AdX divestiture
US District Judge Leonie Brinkema in Alexandria, Virginia, declined on Wednesday to order the forced sale of Google's online advertising exchange, AdX. The decision rebuffs the US Department of Justice and a coalition of state attorneys general, who sought a breakup of Alphabet's ad technology stack following an antitrust victory. Judge Brinkema rejected structural divestiture and accepted behavioral remedies proposed by the parties, requiring Google to open select ad tech tools to rival services. The complete opinion and the specific compliance terms will remain sealed for 14 days to enable both sides to redact confidential business information.
- The DOJ and state attorneys general sue Google over digital advertising monopolies
- Judge Brinkema rules Google holds illegal monopolies in ad servers and exchanges
- Judge Brinkema rejects the DOJ demand to force a sale of the AdX exchange
Anticompetitive findings in ad auctions
The antitrust case began in 2023 when federal enforcers and states sued Google over its control of online publisher tools and ad exchange networks. In April 2025, Judge Brinkema ruled that Google held illegal monopolies in ad servers for publishers and ad exchanges connecting buyers and sellers. The court found that Google unlawfully locked publishers using its ad server into utilizing its AdX exchange, where publishers pay a 20% fee on real-time auctions triggered when users load web pages. Government attorneys asserted during the remedies proceedings that Google commanded an 87% share of the ad-sales technology market and could not be trusted to manage the exchange fairly.
- Overall revenue
- 4.1 %
- Operating profit
- 1.5 %
Google defense and public reaction
Google resisted divestiture throughout the case, arguing that spinning off AdX would create technical friction and disrupt publisher revenue streams. The company previously proposed selling AdX in 2024 to settle a European Union probe, but asserted in US court that the federal government's breakup demands were broader and operationally unfeasible. Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google's vice president for regulatory affairs, defended the outcome in an official statement.
We're very pleased the Court rejected the DOJ's proposal to break apart tools that help small businesses reach new customers and grow.
Tech accountability advocates criticized the ruling. Sacha Haworth, executive director of The Tech Oversight Project, condemned the reliance on behavioral modifications.
It takes an Olympic level of mental gymnastics to find that Google is operating an illegal monopoly and then decide to do nothing about it.
Antitrust enforcement across big tech
The decision represents the second time federal courts have declined to break up Google despite establishing monopoly liability. In 2024, US District Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google monopolized online search, yet rejected government demands to divest the Chrome web browser and Android operating system. Federal courts also rejected Federal Trade Commission demands to force Meta to divest Instagram and WhatsApp, while game publisher Epic Games secured an order requiring Google to open its mobile app store. According to court records and Wedbush research, Google's Ad Manager generated 4.1% of company revenue and 1.5% of operating profit in 2020, with subsequent financial data remaining redacted.
