The breakup threat to Alphabet’s business operations continues to grow, after a lawyer for the US Department of Justice (DoJ) requested a second core Google unit be spun off.

The Guardian reported that last Friday, US DoJ lawyers asked a judge to break up Google’s hugely profitable ad technology business.

Last month US District Judge Leonie Brinkema in Alexandria, Virginia had ruled that Google unlawfully monopolised markets for publisher ad servers and the market for ad exchanges which sit between buyers and sellers.

That was the second time in less than a year that Google was found to be operating an illegal monopoly in the tech space.

Ad tech breakup

“We have a defendant who has found ways to defy” the law, US government lawyer Julia Tarver Wood was quoted by the Guardian as telling a federal court in Virginia last week, as she urged the judge to dismiss Google’s assurance that it would change its behaviour.

“Leaving a recidivist monopolist” intact was not appropriate to solve the issue, she reportedly added.

The US government specifically alleged that Google controls the market for publishing banner ads on websites, including those of many creators and small news providers.

The Guardian reported that the hearing in a Virginia courtroom was scheduled to plan out the second phase of the trial (the remedies trial), set for September 2025, in which the parties will argue over how to fix the ad market to satisfy the judge’s ruling.

In the first phase of the trial last year, the DoJ had argued that the vast majority of websites use Google ad software products which, combined, leave no way for publishers to escape Google’s advertising technology and pricing.

Judge Brinkema agreed with most of that reasoning when she ruled last month that Google had built an illegal monopoly over ad software and tools used by publishers, but partially dismissed the argument related to tools used by advertisers.

The US government said it would use the trial to recommend that Google should spin off its ad publisher and exchange operations, as Google could not be trusted to change its ways.

“Behavioural remedies are not sufficient because you can’t prevent Google from finding a new way to dominate,” Tarver Wood was quoted as saying.

Google said it would appeal the portion of a judge’s ruling that found its advertising business constitutes an illegal monopoly.

Google’s response

The Guardian reported that Google said in response it would recommend agreeing to a binding commitment that it would share information with advertisers and publishers on its ad tech platforms.

However Google lawyer Karen Dunn did reportedly acknowledge the “trust issues” raised in the case and said the company would accept monitoring to guarantee any commitments made to satisfy the judge.

Google is also arguing that calls for divestment are not appropriate in this case, which Judge Brinkema reportedly refused as an argument.

The Guardian noted that the judge urged both sides to mediate, stressing that coming to a compromise solution would be cost-effective and more efficient than running a weeks-long trial.

Second breakup request

The demand for Google to spin off its ad tech business is the second such request by the US government.

Judge Amit Mehta had ruled in August 2024 Google operated a search monopoly, writing at the time “the court reaches the following conclusion: Google is a monopolist, and it has acted as one to maintain its monopoly.”

Alphabet pays Apple, Samsung, Mozilla and others billions of dollars to make Google the default search engine on their devices.

In November 2024 the DoJ demanded that Google must sell its Chrome browser; share data and search results with rivals; and take a range of other measures to end its monopoly on online search, including addressing its ownership of the Android operating system.

In March 2025 the DoJ had dropped a proposal to force Google to sell its investments in AI companies such as Anthropic.