Google Avoids Breakup: US Judge Rejects Ad Business Divestiture

On September 2, 2026, a US federal judge rejected the US Department of Justice's request to compel Alphabet Inc., Google's parent company, to divest its ad exchange AdX. Judge Leonie Brinkema ruled at the court in Alexandria, Virginia, against the mandated breakup of the ad business.

This marks the third failed attempt by US antitrust authorities to unwind a Big Tech conglomerate by divesting core business elements. Following the decision, the US Department of Justice considered further legal action, with the ruling viewed as a setback for the US government.

Monopoly Confirmed, Breakup Nevertheless Rejected

The proceedings stem from a lawsuit filed by the US Department of Justice and numerous US states in 2023. In 2025, the same judge ruled that Google operated an illegal monopoly in the online advertising and ad exchange market. The US internet company had forced advertisers to use its AdX exchange. The court confirmed Google's monopoly position in publisher tools and intermediation technology.

Despite this finding, the court now ruled against the forced divestiture demanded by the Department of Justice. Judge Brinkema expressed substantial practical concerns during the trial: a breakup would take years, as Google would appeal any such ruling. Additionally, it remained unclear who would acquire and operate the ad exchange going forward. Google argued that a forced divestiture of AdX would be technically difficult and would lead to prolonged uncertainty among advertisers.

Behavioral Requirements Instead of Divestiture

Rather than a breakup, the court demands changes in business conduct to give competitors fair opportunities. The exact details of the requirements were still under seal at the time of the ruling's announcement. Both parties were given a window of up to 14 days to redact confidential information for the later public version of the ruling's rationale.

The court also rejected the government's demand to disclose source code for ad auctions. Google instead offered easier switching to competing ad exchanges.

Economic Significance of the Ad Business for Alphabet

The adtech business—the technical infrastructure for automated ad intermediation—generated approximately 30 billion US dollars for Alphabet in the year before the decision, but accounts for an estimated less than one percent of profit. Google's strategic focus has long since shifted to AI-powered search functions and proprietary ad formats.

The company expressed satisfaction with the ruling, describing it as substantial relief.

Parallel to Earlier Search Engine Antitrust Case

The decision mirrors an earlier Google antitrust case: in November 2025, a US court found Google held a monopoly in search but likewise rejected a breakup as excessive. Instead, the court imposed behavioral requirements. Analysts had subsequently seen significantly lower chances that Judge Brinkema would order a divestiture of the ad business—an assessment that has now proven correct.

Other Alphabet business units also remain untouched: according to court rulings from 2026, the conglomerate need not divest either the Chrome browser or the Android operating system, although it was ordered to share data with competitors.

Analysis: Limits of Antitrust Breakups

The September 2, 2026 decision demonstrates the practical limits of antitrust intervention in the structure of large technology companies. While US antitrust authorities have increasingly pursued alleged monopolies of Big Tech companies in recent years, they have yet to successfully enforce a structural breakup.

Courts instead favor behavioral requirements intended to enable competition without dismantling corporate structure. Whether these requirements are sufficient to break up Google's monopoly position in the ad market, which the court has established, will become clear in the coming years.