The Justice Department’s antitrust chief, Gail Slater, attempted to end the detail of her chief of staff, Sara Matar, but Attorney General Pam Bondi intervened and the detail was extended. Slater briefly posted on X that the detail had concluded, then deleted the post after DOJ called it inaccurate. The dispute reflects a broader clash between populist, corporate-skeptical officials and traditional Republican regulators and follows turmoil in high-profile cases such as the HPE–Juniper review, which led to two deputies’ departures and public criticism from Roger Alford.
DOJ Antitrust Turmoil: Bondi Reverses Slater’s Move to Remove Top Aide
The Justice Department’s antitrust division erupted into a public power struggle Friday after division head Gail Slater moved to end the detail of her chief of staff, Sara Matar, only to be overruled by Attorney General Pam Bondi. Slater briefly posted on X that Matar’s “detail has concluded,” then deleted the message; DOJ later said the post was inaccurate and that Matar’s detail has been extended.
What Happened
According to people familiar with the matter, Slater opted not to renew Matar’s expiring assignment, but Bondi intervened and informed Slater that she lacked authority to terminate the detail. A DOJ spokesman said the deleted post was removed because it was inaccurate. Matar did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Wider Stakes
The episode highlights a deepening rift inside the Trump administration’s competition enforcement apparatus between populist, corporate-skeptical officials and traditional Republican officials who favor a lighter regulatory approach. Sources say some companies whose mergers have been scrutinized by Slater’s office secured favorable settlements by appealing directly to other senior DOJ officials.
High-Profile Fallout
The tensions have surfaced most publicly in the dispute over Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s proposed acquisition of Juniper, which coincided with the ouster of two of Slater’s deputies. One former deputy, Roger Alford, has publicly criticized the department’s handling of merger reviews. In an August speech, Alford accused the DOJ of distorting its mission and suggested decision-making could be influenced by political connections:
“Decisions are being made depending on whether the request or information comes from a MAGA friend,” Mr. Alford said, adding the department has in some cases “pervert[ed] justice.”
Slater’s Position
Slater — who arrived with a reputation that resonated among both MAGA-aligned figures and progressive critics of consolidation — has not reflexively blocked transactions. She declined to pursue a Biden administration case to block a corporate-travel merger, saying it would not be a prudent use of taxpayer resources. Still, she faces intense oversight and involvement from senior Trump officials and has received limited public backing from Vice President J.D. Vance, with whom she previously worked in the Senate.
Why it matters: The dispute underscores how personnel battles and political influence can shape antitrust enforcement priorities, with potential implications for major corporate deals and the DOJ’s credibility on competition policy.
Help us improve.
