Washington, DC –  Congressman Jerry Nadler (D-NY-12) joined U.S. Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and Representatives Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash-07.), Chris Deluzio (D-Pa.-17), Becca Balint (D-Vt.), Angie Craig (D-Minn.-02), and Jamie Raskin (D-Md.-08) in requesting that the Department of Justice (DOJ) Acting Inspector General (IG) William M. Blier open a new, independent investigation into potential corruption involving the DOJ's antitrust-related activity. 

The request follows multiple questionable antitrust enforcement decisions by the Trump administration after meetings between DOJ leadership and corporate lobbyists, as well as the ouster of former Attorney General Pam Bondi and former Antitrust Division head Gail Slater. This pattern raises fresh concerns that the DOJ will intensify its efforts to carry out President Trump’s personal agenda rather than uphold the rule of law.

“These cases reveal an alarming pattern of behavior in which top DOJ officials have repeatedly overridden antitrust enforcement efforts, potentially at the urging of politically connected corporate lobbyists and influence peddlers, regardless of the merits of the antitrust issues raised in the matters before the DOJ, including proposed mergers,” wrote the lawmakers.

Public reporting over the past year has revealed multiple instances in which DOJ officials appear to have overruled antitrust experts after meeting with corporate lobbyists to deliver favorable decisions — potentially contrary to the law — for companies seeking deal approvals or other favorable treatment from the government. These decisions have raised serious concerns under antitrust, federal ethics, and bribery laws and regulations and wholly undermine the DOJ Antitrust Division’s mission.  

“We request that your office conduct an evaluation of potential misconduct by any employees – including current employees like Acting Attorney General Blanche and Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward, and former employees like former Attorney General Bondi and former chief of staff Chad Mizelle, who met with lobbyists with business pending before the DOJ Antitrust Division. We also ask that your office examine the role corporate lobbyists have had in influencing DOJ’s antitrust enforcement actions since January 20, 2025,” wrote the lawmakers. 

In addition to Bondi’s firing and the ouster of former DOJ Antitrust Head Gail Slater, the lawmakers highlighted key instances in which political influence potentially swayed Trump DOJ officials, including: DOJ’s settlement of the lawsuit to block HPE’s proposed acquisition of Juniper; its dismissal of the lawsuit to block Amex GBT’s acquisition of CWT; its settlement of the lawsuit to block the proposed merger of UnitedHealth and Amedisys; its rubber-stamping of the proposed Compass-Anywhere merger; its failure to extend the waiting period for the Paramount-Warner Bros. merger; its settlement of the lawsuit alleging illegal monopolization by Live Nation-Ticketmaster; and its clearance of the merger between Nexstar and TEGNA. 

Some companies with business before the DOJ hired Ballard Partners, the previous employer of former Attorney General Pam Bondi, to lobby her and other DOJ leadership. Ballard Partners also previously employed White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles. The Antitrust Division has not blocked a transaction on antitrust grounds since President Trump took office this term, and the DOJ has allowed a host of concerning mergers to proceed without a challenge.

“Antitrust enforcement should promote competition and help workers and families based on the law and facts of the case, not political favors worked out with well-connected lobbyists,” concluded the lawmakers.

The lawmakers pressed the Inspector General to investigate whether DOJ officials have engaged in misconduct, including with respect to the incidents described above, as well as respond to questions regarding whether DOJ officials have potentially influenced antitrust matters involving their former clients or employers and the extent to which such activity has compromised the credibility and integrity of the decision-making process at DOJ. 

###