Google will not be forced to break up its advertising business, a federal judge ruled this week, though the company must change how it operates to give competitors a fairer position in the market.
The decision came from federal judge Leonie M. Brinkema of the Eastern District of Virginia, who oversaw the government’s ad-technology case against the search giant. Rather than requiring Google to sell off its lucrative ad operation, Brinkema ordered the company to adjust its business practices to favor rivals. Her ruling did not spell out specifics on how Google should accomplish that.
Years of Antitrust Pressure
The Justice Department has pursued Google’s advertising empire across two separate antitrust lawsuits. The first, filed in 2020, targeted Google’s dominance in search. The second, filed in 2023, focused specifically on the company’s ad-technology business. Both argued that Google’s control over the digital advertising economy amounts to an illegal monopoly.
Courts have largely agreed with the government. In 2024, a court found that Google’s search business, including its highly profitable search-ad operation, was an illegal monopoly and had used its power to dominate the industry. In April 2025, a second court reached the same conclusion in the ad-tech case. This week’s decision addressed only the remedy for that earlier finding.
No Chrome or Android Divestiture
Following the 2024 ruling, Justice Department officials floated several ways to dismantle Google’s search business, including forcing it to sell the Chrome browser and the Android operating system. In September 2025, Judge Amit Mehta rejected those requests, ruling that Google could keep both. He did order the company to end exclusive default-placement deals and share certain search data with competitors, remedies Google is currently appealing.
The same pattern repeated this week. Brinkema’s full written ruling will stay under seal for 14 days to allow the parties to make necessary redactions.
How Google Cemented Its Dominance
Much of the government’s case centered on Google’s tactics to keep its search engine set as the default across devices worldwide, which in turn strengthened its advertising business. According to the government, Google relied on exclusive agreements with device manufacturers to become the default search engine across large portions of the mobile phone market.
The company also struck revenue-sharing arrangements with mobile carriers, giving them a cut of ad revenue in exchange for keeping Google as the default option. Those deals further solidified its position as the de facto search engine across phone markets.
Google framed the outcome as a victory. Lee-Anne Mulholland, the company’s vice president for regulatory affairs, said the company was very pleased the court rejected the proposal to break apart tools that help small businesses reach new customers and grow. The finding that Google had acted illegally in maintaining its ad-tech business dates back to April 2025.
Source
Image: techcrunch.com
