Recent federal rulings against Google signal a judicial reluctance to dismantle monopolies, favoring behavioral fixes over structural divestitures even as new multi-billion dollar acquisitions emerge in the AI infrastructure and banking sectors.
The Department of Justice’s campaign to restore competition to the digital economy hit a familiar wall this week. On September 2, 2026, Judge Leonie Brinkema of the Eastern District of Virginia rejected the government’s request to force Google to divest its AdX advertising exchange. While the court found Google liable for maintaining an illegal monopoly over the tools that power online advertising, it stopped short of the structural remedy the DOJ argued was necessary to fix the broken market. This ruling establishes a troubling pattern of judicial restraint that favors the status quo of corporate power over the restoration of a truly competitive marketplace.
This decision mirrors the September 2025 order by Judge Amit Mehta in the separate DOJ search-monopoly case. In that instance, the court also declined to order a structural breakup of the Chrome browser or Android operating system, despite finding that Google had illegally maintained its dominance through exclusive default-placement contracts. Instead, the court mandated data-sharing, syndication access for rivals, and a six-year technical compliance committee. By opting for these ‘behavioral fixes’ rather than divestiture, the courts allow dominant firms to keep their integrated empires intact, provided they promise to play by a new set of complex, bureaucratic rules.
The reluctance of the judiciary to order divestitures comes at a critical moment for market concentration. As AI infrastructure spending surges—reaching an annual pace of more than $75 billion this July—dominant players are moving to consolidate their grip on the supply chain. For example, Vertiv recently announced a $1.45 billion acquisition of UtilityInnovation Group to bolster its position in microgrid and data center power solutions. While the deal is subject to regulatory approval and not expected to close until Q4 2026, it highlights the growing appetite for consolidation in the segments that power the next generation of computing.
Simultaneously, the DOJ’s Antitrust Division has shifted its posture, announcing a ‘fast-track’ merger review process. By narrowing initial information requests to the most glaring risks in exchange for longer review times, the government risks missing the subtle, long-term threats to competition inherent in deals like the Vertiv acquisition or TabaPay’s plan to acquire Transact Bank. TabaPay, a payments infrastructure firm, aims to rebrand as ‘TabaBank’ after securing $155 million in strategic growth financing. This move to obtain a full bank charter represents a vertical integration that could squeeze out smaller community banks and independent payment processors.
The current enforcement landscape is one of high-profile liability findings followed by restrained consequences. While the FTC continues to pursue Amazon for allegedly overcharging sellers by $20 billion in advertising fees, the Google precedents suggest that even a victory in court may not result in the structural changes needed to level the playing field. The policy debate is now focused on whether the DOJ’s proposed remedies—such as open-sourced auction logic and 10-year oversight—are being blunted by a judiciary that is hesitant to interfere with corporate structures.
For the American consumer and the independent entrepreneur, the message from the courts is clear: corporate giants may be found guilty of breaking the rules of the free market, but they will rarely be forced to give up the spoils of their conquest. Until the threat of a breakup is back on the table, the incentive for dominant firms to engage in anti-competitive behavior remains largely intact. The DOJ now faces a critical choice on whether to appeal these remedy decisions or accept a future where monopolies are managed by regulators rather than dismantled by the law.
Greg Sanders serves as the Senior Correspondent for Corporate Power and Antitrust at Just Right News, where he brings a principled, conservative perspective to the complex intersection of big business, government regulation, and the American consumer. With a career dedicated to investigative depth and economic clarity, Greg has become a leading voice in examining how the consolidation of industry power impacts the foundational values of the free market and individual liberty.
Raised in Denver, Colorado, Greg’s reporting is deeply informed by the Western spirit of independence and a healthy skepticism of centralized authority. Growing up in the shadows of the Rockies, he witnessed firsthand the importance of local entrepreneurship and the vital role that small-medium enterprises play in sustaining vibrant communities. This upbringing instilled in him a belief that the American Dream is best preserved when the playing field remains level and when competition—rather than backroom deals between corporate lobbyists and federal regulators—dictates success. For Greg, the rugged individualism of his home state serves as a constant reminder that the economy should serve the people, not the other way around.
Now based in Chicago, Illinois, Greg operates from the heart of the nation’s industrial and financial crossroads. His location in the Midwest provides him with a unique vantage point to observe the real-world consequences of corporate overreach. From the boardrooms of the Loop to the manufacturing hubs that define the region, he tracks the movement of capital and the shifting tides of market influence. Chicago’s history as a center of trade and labor offers a rich backdrop for his work, allowing him to bridge the gap between high-level economic theory and the lived experiences of hardworking Americans who feel the squeeze of monopolistic practices.
At Just Right News, Greg’s beat focuses on the “new monopolies” and the rise of “woke” corporate culture. He argues that when corporations become too large, they often abandon their fiduciary duties to shareholders in favor of social engineering and political posturing. His reporting seeks to hold these “Titans” accountable, ensuring that the power of the purse is not used to silence dissent or bypass the democratic process. He is a firm advocate for the idea that true conservatism requires a vigilant defense of competition, preventing any single entity—public or private—from exerting undue control over the lives of citizens.
This mission is most clearly seen in his acclaimed feature series, “The Titans and the Toll.” In this ongoing project, Greg explores the human cost of market consolidation, from the erosion of consumer choice to the decline of local economies. Through rigorous analysis and boots-on-the-ground reporting, he documents how the concentration of power in sectors like tech, agriculture, and finance creates a “toll” paid by the average family.
Greg Sanders remains committed to the idea that a transparent, competitive market is the greatest engine for prosperity ever devised. Through his work at Just Right News, he continues to provide the essential oversight necessary to protect that engine from the encroaching influence of corporate giants and the bureaucratic structures that enable them.