For the third time in just 16 months, a federal court has ruled that Google runs an illegal monopoly.
District Court Judge Leonie Brinkema found the Big Tech behemoth Google to have illegally maintained a monopoly in the advertising market. The decision follows similar rulings in separate federal courts holding that Google also violated antitrust law when operating its search engine and app store.
Brinkema’s 115-page decision, issued on April 17, 2025, held that Google was an illegal monopoly in both the “publisher ad server” and “ad exchange” markets. Both monopolies were operated through the Google platform “Ad Manager,” which facilitates both online advertising sales and the placement of those same ad purchases.
Brinkema wrote: “[The] Plaintiffs have proven that Google has willfully engaged in a series of anticompetitive acts to acquire and maintain monopoly power … In addition to depriving rivals of the ability to compete, this exclusionary conduct substantially harmed Google’s publisher customers, the competitive process, and, ultimately, consumers of information on the open web.”
Google, a subsidiary of the megacorporation Alphabet, owns a plethora of tech platforms, including Ad Manager, Google Drive, Gemini, Gmail, Kaggle, the Google Play Store and YouTube. Google also developed and manages the Android operating system.
Brinkema also held that Google engaged in an illegal antitrust violation called “tying,” where a company uses its competitive advantage in one market to restrain trade in the market for a different product. Specifically, Brinkema found that Google forced users of Ad Manager to pledge not to pay Google’s competitors in the ad market more than they paid Google — even if the competitor offered a more desirable service.
This suit against Google was first brought by the Biden administration and eight American states in 2023. An additional nine states later joined the litigation, which continued under President Donald Trump. The litigants against Google were represented by both Republican and Democrat attorneys general. Brinkema was appointed to the bench by President Bill Clinton.
Brinkema’s ruling is the third federal antitrust suit Google lost in just sixteen months. An August 2024 ruling in a separate case found Google had maintained an illegal monopoly in the search engine market. In December 2023, yet another federal court found Google violated antitrust law in the app store market.
Furthermore, in July 2024, a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court rejected an attempt by Google’s trade association, NetChoice, to strike down Florida and Texas laws which limited political censorship by some of Google’s platforms.
In her ruling, Brinkema lectured Google for “systemic disregard of the evidentiary rules regarding spoliation of evidence.” Brinkema stated that Google’s staff had deliberately destroyed documents they were required to produce in court and had knowingly mislabeled others.
Brinkema rejected a request that she hold Google liable for buying up its one-time competitors Admeld and DoubleClick. Brinkema conceded Google’s executives held anticompetitive motives during the purchases of their rivals, but noted that the administration of then-President Barack Obama had approved the buy-outs.
Brinkema stated that the current trial will now enter its “remedies” phase, where the states and the Trump administration have the opportunity to argue that Google should be broken up.
Google’s legal peril has significant ramifications for free expression in the United States. The Media Research Center (MRC)’s exclusive CensorTrack database has recorded over 1,300 documented cases of censorship by Google. MRC has documented how Google consistently discriminates against right-leaning news sources and hid Republican candidates’ campaign websites during the 2022 and 2024 elections.
Free Speech is under attack! Contact your representatives and demand they hold Google accountable for violating our antitrust laws. If you have been censored, reach us using CensorTrack’s contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.
