Ex-DOJ Official Slams Leadership, Claims Lobbyists Warped Antitrust Enforcement

Roger Alford, who until recently served as principal deputy assistant attorney general in the DOJ’s antitrust division, was dismissed last month amid internal clashes over how the department handled Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s $14 billion acquisition of Juniper Networks. His removal coincided with the firing of Bill Rinner, the division’s deputy assistant attorney general and head of merger enforcement.

Speaking Monday at the Tech Policy Institute Aspen Forum, Alford described an internal rift between what he called “MAGA reformers and MAGA-in-name-only lobbyists.” He alleged that some within the department were prioritizing political favoritism over the rule of law, a charge that has heightened scrutiny of the merger settlement. According to the Hill, Alford argued that senior officials were enabling lobbyists to pursue their own agendas rather than advancing the administration’s stated antitrust goals.

The merger had initially faced resistance from the Trump administration, which filed suit in January to block the deal. But by late June, the DOJ announced a settlement allowing the acquisition to proceed if HPE sold off its small and medium business division and agreed to license Juniper’s software to rivals. Per the Hill, the agreement was reached after Attorney General Pam Bondi’s chief of staff Chad Mizelle intervened and overruled Antitrust Division head Gail Slater, a move that intensified tensions inside the department.

Related: Nine Ex-DOJ Antitrust Chiefs Ask Senate To Confirm Kanter As Antitrust Head

Alford singled out Mizelle and Stanley Woodward, who has been nominated for associate attorney general, accusing them of undermining the rule of law in their handling of the case. He alleged that some DOJ officials and political appointees were steering outcomes based on whether companies aligned themselves with allies of former President Trump, while others were penalized if considered unfriendly to his circle.

Slater, meanwhile, reportedly told companies not to approach the department through Trump-connected lobbyists, further fueling internal friction. Alford warned that influence peddlers were now overwhelming DOJ leadership, with cases increasingly resolved on political connections rather than legal merits.

In response, a Justice Department spokesperson dismissed Alford’s remarks as the “delusional musings of a disgruntled ex,” according to the Hill. The spokesperson maintained that the HPE-Juniper settlement was justified by the merits of the deal and national security considerations flagged by intelligence agencies.

The controversy has drawn attention on Capitol Hill. Several Senate Democrats have called for the DOJ inspector general to investigate potential political interference in merger reviews. Lawmakers have also pressed Hewlett Packard Enterprise over its use of outside consultants, suggesting the company may have attempted to exert improper pressure on the department.

For its part, HPE has defended the transaction, saying it was “appropriately approved with certain remedies” and would strengthen competition in the market.

Source: The Hill