The Justice Department's pursuit of Google's dominance in the digital ad economy has reached a critical juncture. Two years ago, the government filed two separate antitrust lawsuits against the tech giant – one focused on search and another on its ad-technology business.

Both cases have now been resolved, with courts largely siding with the government's claims that Google's grip on the market represents an illegal monopoly.

A federal judge in 2024 ruled that Google's search business, including its lucrative search-ad operation, was a clear case of monopolistic behavior. The court found that Google had "exercised its monopoly power" to dominate the search industry and search ads.

Read More: US Super PAC Backed by Silicon Valley Titans Pushes Data Center and AI Expansion

This ruling came hot on the heels of another court decision last April, which focused specifically on Google's ad-tech business and reached the same conclusion.

Following 2024 ruling, justice department

Following the 2024 ruling, Justice Department officials floated various ideas for breaking up Google's search business, including divesting its Chrome browser and Android operating system. However, in September 2025, a judge rejected these proposals, allowing Google to keep both Chrome and Android intact.

The company was, however, ordered to end exclusive default-placement deals and share certain search data with competitors – remedies that Google is currently appealing.

Also Read: Lachy Groom backs Indian startup aiming to keep aircraft in the air with autonomous inspections

On Wednesday, federal judge Leonie M. Brinkema handed down another ruling in the ad-tech case, this time addressing the remedy for Google's actions. In a surprise move, Brinkema ruled that Google would be allowed to keep its advertising business intact, but was required to make significant changes to its business practices to favor competitors.

"We're very pleased the Court rejected the DOJ's proposal to break apart tools that help small businesses reach new customers and grow," said Lee-Anne Mulholland, Google's vice president for regulatory affairs. The company framed the outcome as a win, highlighting the potential impact on its ad-tech business.

The online advertising ecosystem is notoriously opaque, with much of the government's case against Google revolving around the company's tactics to ensure that its search engine was the default engine in devices across the world. To achieve this, Google used exclusive agreements with device manufacturers and revenue sharing agreements with mobile carriers – deals that cemented its position as the de facto search engine across phone markets.