A US judge in Virginia has rejected the Justice Department's bid to force Google to sell its online advertising exchange, AdX, sparing Alphabet's subsidiary from a breakup of its advertising technology business.
The ruling is the second powerful symbolic victory for Google against the US Department of Justice in its efforts to force the company to sell assets to address illegal monopolies, although the ad exchange represents only a small part of Google's business.
Judge declines to order AdX sale
US judge Leonie Brinkema, sitting in Alexandria, Virginia, declined to make Google sell AdX, where publishers pay Google a 20% fee to sell ads in auctions that happen instantly when users load websites. She accepted most of the parties' proposed behavioral remedies.
The justice department and a broad coalition of states sued Google in 2023 over its dominance in markets for advertising technology used by online publishers and websites.
In April 2025, Brinkema ruled that Google holds illegal monopolies on servers that host publisher ads and ad exchanges which sit between buyers and sellers. Google unlawfully locked publishers on its ad server into using its AdX, the judge found.
Anticompetitive conduct findings
The tech company's anticompetitive conduct "substantially harmed Google's publisher customers, the competitive process, and, ultimately, consumers of information on the open web", Brinkema said at the time.
At a trial last year on remedies in the case, the justice department argued that Google cannot be trusted to run AdX, given its past behavior. Google argued that a forced sale would be technically difficult and result in a long and painful transition that would hurt customers.
The company also sought to show the justice department's demand was different from Google's own previous offer to sell AdX to end an EU antitrust investigation, which Reuters reported in 2024.
Revenue share and broader context
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. More recent figures were redacted from court documents.
The ruling is the third time in a row that a judge has rejected a bid by US antitrust enforcers to break up big tech in a crackdown that started during Donald Trump's first term. It is likely to fuel questions about whether courts are up to the task of checking the industry's unprecedented power over the US economy.
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.
Likewise, another judge in Washington, who previously ruled that Google holds an illegal monopoly in online search, rejected the justice department's bid to make the company sell its Chrome browser, citing rising competition from generative artificial intelligence companies such as OpenAI's ChatGPT.
US antitrust cases against Amazon and Apple, which involve big smartphone and online retail markets, will not go to trial until 2027 at the earliest.
