Federal court considers structural fixes after Google found to hold illegal ad monopoly

Google returned to federal court as the U.S. Government pressed its case for sweeping structural remedies aimed at curbing what it describes as years of anti-competitive conduct in the digital advertising market.

The hearing in Alexandria, Virginia, marked the final stage of proceedings that will help U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema decide how to address the tech giant’s unlawful dominance. In April, after a lengthy trial, Brinkema ruled that key components of Google’s ad-tech business had been manipulated in ways that created an illegal monopoly.

The Justice Department is urging the court to order Google to divest parts of its advertising technology stack, arguing that only a breakup can prevent further abuse. Government lawyers have described the company as a “recidivist monopolist”, citing both its conduct in the ad-tech sector and its separate search monopoly case. In that matter, prosecutors also sought a breakup, but a judge declined to force Google to sell its Chrome browser.

Despite facing reforms in the search ruling, Google escaped harsher penalties, a result widely viewed as a light reprimand. Alphabet’s market value has risen sharply since September, fuelled by investor confidence that the company avoided severe sanctions.

Google insists that dismantling its ad-tech systems, which process an estimated 55 million advertising requests per second, would be risky, warning that disruptions could have far-reaching consequences for publishers, advertisers and consumers. The company has argued instead for more limited changes aimed at improving transparency and competition. Its lawyers have criticised the government’s proposals as “legally unprecedented and unsupported divestitures”.

Google has also pointed to rapid shifts in the digital landscape, particularly the rise of artificial intelligence, as a reason for the court to proceed cautiously. A separate ruling earlier this year acknowledged AI as an emerging competitive force.

The Justice Department, however, maintains that Google cannot be trusted to reform itself. It has relied on testimony from industry witnesses who described how the company can alter complex algorithms in ways that are difficult for regulators to detect.

Judge Brinkema’s decision is expected early next year.