US Google Ad Exchange Stays: Court Blocks Sale Demand

On Thursday, September 3, 2026, a US Google court ruling from Judge Leonie Brinkema ended months of legal wrangling over whether the company must divest its advertising marketplace. The decision allows the tech giant to retain control of the exchange, rejecting the European Commission‘s argument that only a structural sale would cure competition concerns.

The US Google ruling and what it changes

Judge Leonie Brinkema, presiding over the case, concluded that behavioural remedies and conduct requirements could address competitive harms without forcing a sale.

The decision is a significant win for the company, which had argued that divesting the exchange would damage a system that powers much of the open web’s programmatic advertising. The court’s reasoning centred on the technical complexity of sepaThe Next Web, the judge accepted arguments that behavioural oversight could preserve competition while keeping the platform intact.

Us google: What the European Commission demanded

European regulators had previously insisted that only a structural divestiture would resolve the conflict. Their position echoed remedies pursued under the Digital Markets Act, which forces gatekeeper platforms to open up core services or face fines.

The Commission’s stance has been that conduct remedies alone were insufficient to break what it described as self-preferencing in ad auctions. That position now clashes directly with the American court’s finding. The divergence sets up a transatlantic split in how competition authorities treat the same ad tech problem.

The $2.95 billion remedy package

A reported $2.95 billion figure has circulated in connection with the remedies under discussion. While the exact breakdown was not detailed in Thursday’s coverage, the sum signals how high the financial stakes are for both the company and its publishing partners who depend on ad revenue flowing through the exchange.

For context, behavioural remedies typically involve ongoing compliance costs, monitoring, and potential fines for future violations. A sale, by contrast, would have produced a one-time transaction but severed a system that connects billions of ad impressions daily.

The DMA compliance angle

The ruling arrives as the company continues its parallel compliance efforts under the EU’s Digital Markets Act. Regulators in Brussels have signalled that behavioural changes may not satisfy DMA requirements, leaving open the possibility of separate enforcement actions even as the US court closes this chapter.

This dual-track scrutiny — one track in US courtrooms, another in EU regulatory halls — means the exchange will face continued pressure regardless of Thursday’s outcome.

What comes next for the ad exchange

The court’s decision buys time, but it does not end the regulatory pressure. The European Commission retains the ability to pursue its own remedies through DMA enforcement, and rivals in the ad tech industry are likely to test the boundaries of the conduct requirements in coming quarters.

For publishers and advertisers using the exchange, the immediate effect is stability. The longer-term question is whether two regulatory superpowers will arrive at compatible answers, or whether the exchange will face a different fate on the other side of the Atlantic.

What did the US court decide about Google’s ad exchange?

Judge Leonie Brinkema ruled on September 3, 2026 that the company does not need to sell its ad exchange, accepting behavioural remedies as sufficient.

Why did the European Commission want a sale?

European regulators argued that only structural divestiture would break self-preferencing in ad auctions and restore fair competition in the market.

What is the $2.95 billion figure connected to?

The sum relates to remedies under discussion in the case, signalling the financial stakes for the company and its publishing partners.

Does this ruling affect DMA compliance?

No. The US court ruling does not change the company’s separate obligations under the EU’s Digital Markets Act, which Brussels continues to enforce independently.