How the US ad tech antitrust case against Google unfolded
The Justice Department and a group of states sued Google in January 2023, alleging that it monopolised the technology used to buy and sell online display advertising. Judge Leonie Brinkema found in April 2025 that Google illegally monopolised two of the three markets alleged, and in September 2026 she declined to order a breakup and imposed six years of conduct remedies. The European Commission fined Google 2.95 billion euros in a separate ad tech decision in September 2025.
24 January 2023 to today · 17 dated events · 18 sources
Where it stands now · as of 1 November 2026
Liability has been found and the remedies opinion issued, but as of 1 November 2026 no final judgment had been entered on the disputed terms filed on 2 October 2026, and Google has said it will appeal. In the EU, the Commission was still assessing Google's proposed measures while Google appeals the fine.
Overview · 24 Jan 2023 to 2 Oct 2026 · click a dot to jump
2023
24 Jan 2023
Turning point
Filing
Justice Department and eight states sue Google over ad tech
The Justice Department and the attorneys general of California, Colorado, Connecticut, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Tennessee and Virginia sued Google in the Eastern District of Virginia. They alleged that Google monopolised digital advertising technology in violation of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, including through acquisitions and by conditioning real time access to its ad exchange on use of its publisher ad server.
“No matter the industry and no matter the company, the Justice Department will vigorously enforce our antitrust laws.”Attorney General Merrick B. Garland, US Department of Justice
European Commission sends Google a Statement of Objections
The Commission sent Google a Statement of Objections in June 2023 setting out its preliminary view that Google abused a dominant position in advertising technology, according to the Commission's 2025 decision announcement.
At a hearing, Judge Leonie Brinkema denied the requests for summary judgment, saying too many facts were in dispute and the case had to go to trial, Bloomberg News and a wire report carried by ABC News reported. She had ruled the previous week that the case would be tried without a jury after Google paid the government more than 2 million dollars to cover its claimed damages, which mooted the only claim that required a jury, Bloomberg News and the Boston Globe reported.
The bench trial began with the government alleging that Google's position on both sides of the ad tech market let it keep as much as 36 cents of each advertising dollar. Google argued the case rested on outdated internet habits and a narrow segment of advertising, the Boston Globe reported.
“Google extracted extraordinary fees at the expense of the website publishers”Justice Department lawyers, pretrial filing, The Boston Globe
Brinkema finds Google monopolised two ad tech markets
The court held that Google illegally monopolised the markets for publisher ad servers and ad exchanges for open web display advertising. It found the government had not proved a monopoly in tools advertisers use to buy display ads and had not shown the DoubleClick and Admeld acquisitions were anticompetitive, Bloomberg News reported.
“has willfully engaged in a series of anticompetitive acts to acquire and maintain monopoly power”Judge Leonie Brinkema, Bloomberg News (via Bloomberg Law)
Justice Department calls the ruling a landmark victory
The Justice Department said the court had ruled that Google violated antitrust law by monopolising open web digital advertising markets.
“This is a landmark victory in the ongoing fight to stop Google from monopolizing the digital public square.”Attorney General Pamela Bondi, US Department of Justice
Google said it disagreed with the ruling on its publisher tools and would appeal that part of the decision, Bloomberg News reported. A remedy was left for separate proceedings.
“We disagree with the Court's decision regarding our publisher tools.”Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google vice president of regulatory affairs, Bloomberg News (via Bloomberg Law)
European Commission fines Google 2.95 billion euros
The Commission found that Google breached Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union by favouring its own ad exchange, AdX, in ad selection and bidding since at least 2014. It ordered Google to end the self-preferencing and gave it 60 days to propose measures to address conflicts of interest. Google is appealing the decision.
“Google must now come forward with a serious remedy to address its conflicts of interest”Teresa Ribera, Commission Executive Vice-President, European Commission
Brinkema held an 11 day bench trial on remedies, with testimony cited in her later opinion from 22 September 2025. The Justice Department and states sought structural remedies including a divestiture of AdX, a contingent divestiture of Google's publisher ad server and a 15 year term, while Google proposed behavioural changes lasting six years, the opinion records.
Google said on 14 November 2025 that it had submitted a compliance plan to the Commission that it said would give publishers more pricing options and advertisers more choice, without selling any part of its business, the Associated Press reported. The Commission said it would assess whether the measures end the self-preferencing.
“without a disruptive break-up that would harm the thousands of European publishers and advertisers”Google statement, Associated Press (via WTOP)
The parties presented closing arguments on remedies on 21 November 2025, according to transcript citations in the court's remedies opinion. The Justice Department argued that only a sale of AdX would restore competition and Google called a forced sale too extreme, Reuters reported.
Commission extends its review of Google's proposal
The Commission extended its assessment of Google's compliance plan in March 2026 and had neither accepted nor rejected it by September 2026, The Next Web reported.
Court rejects a breakup and orders behavioural remedies
Brinkema issued a 106 page remedies opinion under seal with a short public order, declining to order Google to sell AdX or its publisher ad server. She ordered behavioural remedies instead and directed the parties to file a joint proposed final judgment within 30 days, Bloomberg News reported.
“the Court finds that structural remedies are neither realistic nor needed”Judge Leonie Brinkema, US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (via CourtListener RECAP)
The public version shows Google may not require websites that use its ad server to also use AdX, must connect AdX and its ad server to the open source Prebid system, and must let AdX bid into rival publisher ad servers on the same terms as its own. A monitor will oversee compliance and the remedies last six years rather than the 15 years sought, Reuters, AdExchanger and The Next Web reported.
“will be sufficient to effectively pry open to competition the ad tech markets”Judge Leonie Brinkema, Reuters (via The Star)
Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward Jr. called the decision a significant victory and said the department was reviewing its options. Google said it would appeal the liability ruling, Reuters reported.
“significant victory”Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward Jr., Reuters (via The Star)
Parties file a proposed final judgment with disputed terms
The United States, 17 states and Google filed one jointly proposed final judgment, labelling and underlining their separate proposals where they could not agree, the court filing shows. In the 41 page document the plaintiffs proposed six months for Google to connect AdX to Prebid and Google proposed 12 months, AdExchanger reported.
Last updated 1 November 2026. Spotted an error? See corrections. Every event links to the record it comes from. Allegations are attributed to whoever made them.
