Judiciary Democrats Probe DOJ’s Settlement of HPE-Juniper Merger Amid Reports Administration Ceded to Lobbyists Over Advice of Antitrust Experts

Washington, D.C. (August 1, 2025)—Today, Rep. Jamie Raskin, Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, and Rep. Jerrold Nadler, Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on the Administrative State, Regulatory Reform, and Antitrust, sent a letter demanding Attorney General Pam Bondi provide information regarding Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE)’s acquisition of Juniper Networks, Inc. (Juniper) after reporting suggests that Trump Administration officials ceded to lobbying efforts and overruled Antitrust Division officials who opposed the settlement, leading to the firing of two deputies. Reporting also suggests that the companies may not have disclosed the involvement of at least one lobbyist with close ties to the White House.

“We write with serious concerns regarding the recent proposed settlement between the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the parties Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE) and Juniper Networks, Inc. (Juniper) that allows, with certain conditions, HPE to acquire Juniper. The settlement terms do not appear to adequately address the anticompetitive harms alleged in DOJ’s complaint opposing the acquisition in January. Public reports suggest that senior Trump Administration officials overruled Antitrust Division Assistant Attorney General (AAG) Gail Slater, who opposed the settlement. Reporting also suggests that the Tunney Act filing associated with this case, a requirement meant to provide transparency into lobbying and government settlements, was itself deficient. We request information regarding this transaction to determine whether, as reporting suggests, inappropriate and potentially corrupt political considerations guided the proposed settlement in this matter rather than a commitment to critical antitrust principles,” wrote the Ranking Members.

In January 2024, HPE announced they had acquired Juniper for $14 billion. HPE and Juniper are the second and third largest firms offering enterprise-grade wireless local area networks (WLAN) to businesses, schools, hospitals, and other networks in the United States. The acquisition would result in two entities that control over 70% of the United States’ enterprise-grade WLAN market, which raises grave antitrust concerns.

Earlier this year, the Trump DOJ Antitrust Division initially filed a lawsuit to block the acquisition, arguing that it would “eliminate fierce head-to-head competition” between the companies, raise prices, reduce innovation, and diminish choice for scores of American businesses and institutions. However, less than two weeks before the trial was scheduled to start, the DOJ abruptly reversed course and approved a settlement. 

According to reports, DOJ Antitrust Division head Gail Slater opposed the decision to settle, but her recommendation was overridden by senior political appointees at DOJ. Reports indicate that HPE hired lobbyists Mike Davis and Arthur Schwartz, close allies to the White House, to convince Administration officials outside of the DOJ Antitrust Division to derail the case. Two senior DOJ officials in the antitrust division were reportedly fired in connection with the case for “insubordination.”

The Ranking Members also expressed their concern regarding the companies’ noncompliance with the Tunney Act, which requires parties to disclose to the court all written and oral communications with any employees of the U.S. and is designed to limit lobbyists’ influence over antitrust enforcement. HPE’s and Juniper’s filings never mentioned communication with Schwartz, despite reporting that he had been advocating on their behalf.

The Ranking Members demanded the DOJ provide documents related to the acquisition; including communications between officials at the White House and the DOJ and between DOJ and the lobbyists.

“The foundation of our economy must be free and fair competition. The Trump Administration appears to be ignoring the advice of its own antitrust subject matter experts, selectively enforcing antitrust laws to favor its own friends and associates, forcing out longtime career attorneys for disagreements about the handling of a case, and ceding the decision to lobbyists whose involvement defendants may not have fully disclosed in direct violation of federal law. […] The harms associated with the failure to enforce the antitrust laws without fear or favor—including higher prices, reduced competition, and less innovation—are ultimately borne by consumers and workers alike. The American people deserve better than this collapse into corruption and plutocracy,” concluded the Ranking Members.

Click here to read the letter.