Slater’s departure at DOJ signals new era for antitrust under Trump
The Hill
by Dominick MastrangeloFebruary 26, 2026
AI-Generated Deep Dive Summary
The sudden resignation of Gail Slater, the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) top antitrust enforcer, has sparked speculation about the Trump administration's strategy toward major anti-monopoly cases and high-profile mergers. With less than a year in her role, Slater’s departure marks an abrupt end to a tenure marked by internal tensions and challenges. Her exit raises questions about the direction of antitrust enforcement under the Trump administration, particularly as it navigates complex cases involving big tech companies and major mergers.
Slater’s time at the helm of the DOJ’s antitrust division was fraught with controversy. Critics argue that her leadership was inconsistent, with some questioning whether her decisions aligned with traditional antitrust principles or political priorities. Her departure comes amid a broader reevaluation of the administration’s approach to competition policy, which has seen a shift toward supporting business consolidation and limiting regulatory actions against large corporations.
The implications of Slater’s exit extend beyond her tenure. It signals a potential pivot in antitrust enforcement under the Trump administration, with some suggesting a move toward more lenient oversight of mergers and less aggressive pursuit of anti-competitive practices. This shift could have significant consequences for industries, particularly tech, where monopolistic behaviors are closely scrutinized. Legal experts warn that a weaker antitrust stance could stifle competition, harm consumers, and set precedents for future administrations.
For readers following politics and business, this development underscores the ongoing tension between regulatory enforcement and corporate interests in the Trump era. The administration’s approach to antitrust issues will likely shape the landscape of market competition and innovation for years to come. As Slater’s departure highlights, the DOJ’s decisions on antitrust cases are not just legal matters but also politically charged statements about the government’s role in regulating business.
Verticals
politicsnews
Originally published on The Hill on 2/26/2026