U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema has been criticized for not ordering Google to break up its digital advertising business, despite previously ruling that the company operated illegal monopolies in the sector. The decision spares Google from selling off its "AdX" marketplace, where it processed online ad sales.
In April 2025, Brinkema had found that Google's actions "substantially harmed" publishers and that the company had destroyed evidence. However, on Wednesday, she rejected the Justice Department's (DOJ) proposal to force the company to sell AdX. Instead, Brinkema ordered Google to implement "most" of the behavioral remedies proposed by the DOJ and a coalition of U.S. states that joined the antitrust lawsuit. The specific remedies are expected to be detailed in a full opinion later this month.
This marks the second time in a year that Google has avoided a forced breakup of its online operations after a judge ruled it dominated a market. Last September, U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta decided against breaking up Google's Chrome web browser, even after finding the company to be a "monopolist" in the online search market.
Antitrust advocates expressed dismay at Brinkema's ruling. Sacha Haworth, executive director of the Tech Oversight Project, called the decision "Olympic level of mental gymnastics" and argued it sends the wrong message regarding Big Tech's impact on innovation. Laurel Kilgour, research manager at the American Economic Liberties Project, stated that the rulings by Brinkema and Mehta highlight the need for Congress to act on structural remedies for these markets.
The judge also denied a request to publish the source code governing AdX. Google's vice president of regulatory affairs, Lee-Anne Mulholland, stated the company is pleased the court rejected the breakup proposal. The Justice Department, while disappointed by the rejection of the divestiture, indicated it was pleased the court ordered "substantial relief" and vowed to continue fighting for fair competition.
In her initial ruling, Brinkema found Google violated the Sherman Act by dominating the online publisher ad server and ad-exchange markets, employing anticompetitive practices and eliminating desirable product features. Brinkema had previously expressed anger over Google's policy of automatically deleting chat histories, known as "Vegas mode," which she called a "clear abuse of privilege" during a court hearing in August 2024, suggesting significant evidence may have been lost.