Google will not be forced to break up its advertising technology business, but a US judge has ordered the company to change the way it operates to give rivals greater opportunity to compete.
Judge Leonie M Brinkema of the Eastern District of Virginia rejected the US Justice Department’s request for a more drastic remedy in its antitrust case against Google’s ad-tech operation. Her ruling means the company can retain the business, although it will have to alter practices that the court found had helped entrench its position.
The judge’s decision dealt with the remedy rather than the underlying finding of wrongdoing. In April last year, the court concluded that Google had acted illegally in maintaining its dominance across parts of the digital advertising market.
Details of the required changes have not yet been set out publicly. The full written ruling will remain sealed for 14 days while the parties make proposed redactions.
The outcome follows a similar decision in a separate case concerning Google’s search business. In 2024, a court ruled that Google had unlawfully maintained a monopoly in online search and search advertising.
The Justice Department subsequently argued that Google should divest major assets, including the Chrome browser and Android operating system. However, Judge Amit Mehta rejected those demands in September 2025, while ordering Google to end exclusive default-placement agreements and share some search data with competitors. Google is appealing those remedies.
Google presented the latest ruling as a victory. Lee-Anne Mulholland, the company’s vice-president for regulatory affairs, said: “We’re very pleased the Court rejected the DOJ’s proposal to break apart tools that help small businesses reach new customers and grow.”
Google’s ad-tech business faces new restrictions
The ad-tech case focused on the complex system linking advertisers, publishers and the digital marketplaces through which adverts are bought and sold. The government argued that Google had used its control over key parts of that system to restrict competition.
It also highlighted agreements that made Google the default search engine on phones and other devices. Deals with manufacturers and revenue-sharing arrangements with mobile networks helped preserve Google’s position, with carriers receiving a share of advertising income in return for keeping the company’s search engine as the default.
The Justice Department had pursued the cases for years in an effort to curb what it described as Google’s illegal control of the digital advertising economy. The latest ruling leaves the company’s core advertising structure intact, but places it under new obligations intended to make it easier for competitors to operate.
