If antitrust laws do not define google as a monopoly, it's obviously the antitrust laws that are wrong. Google is obviously a monopoly.
The 2018 case against Google in the EU (€1.5bn fine) made very similar points and won.
The real problem is what comes next. If recent history is a guide, it will be a cost-of-doing-business fine. This does nothing. At best, they'll adapt practices slightly. Maybe they've adapted enough post 2018 to make this case difficult.
We need a new approach. There is no way antitrust courts can act as regulators effectively. They find that a monopoly exists, but... the goal is not regulated monopolies.
The whole premise of antitrust is that monopolies are harmful in lots of systemic ways. We must assume that most are unknown. A prosecutor & court can't track down every monopolistic mechanism or dynamic and fine google for it. We need to avoid and void monopolies. This is why there are mechanisms to void mergers.
Adwords could IPO independently. They'd be a great, profitable company. So would Google search, youtube, android... All these could be financially viable companies independently.
Total share price would be lower. This reflects the fact that monopolies are more profitable. OTOH, the Google monopoly is an easy one to solve. It's so profitable that financial viability is easily achieved.