Letter to Senator Jeff Sessions - Ensuring the Integrity and Independence of Department of Justice Antitrust Division

Letter

Dear Senator Sessions,

As you know, vigorous competition leads to quality products, lower prices, and an economy that rewards talent. Those goals depend on aggressive antitrust enforcement so that monopolies are not allowed to dominate the marketplace. During your confirmation hearing last week, you committed to making independent antitrust enforcement decisions, saying "there will not be political influence in that process."

Traditionally, the White House has not interfered with antitrust enforcement decisions. Both the Nixon administration's involvement in the Department of Justice's cases against ITT and the television networks, and the Johnson administration's involvement in a bank merger related to the Houston Chronicle are episodes that must not be repeated. Even the appearance of inappropriate interference could irrevocably undermine the legitimacy of antitrust enforcement.

During the same week as your confirmation hearing, the press reported that President-elect Trump had two meetings with companies that are involved in significant acquisitions currently under antitrust review by the Department of Justice. President--elect Trump met with the CEO of AT&T, which is proposing to acquire Time Warner Inc. Although some press reports state that the pending AT&T-Time Warner transaction was raised with the President-elect, AT&T has explicitly denied that the topic was addressed. In a second meeting, President-elect Trump met with the CEOs of Bayer AG and Monsanto. Bayer confirmed that the companies discussed Bayer's proposed acquisition of Monsanto with the President-elect.

The President-elect's high-level meetings last week underscore the importance of your commitment to ensuring the integrity and independence of the Department of Justice's Antitrust Division, and I am asking the following questions to further explore your position on antitrust enforcement.

What are the appropriate factors the Department of Justice should consider in deciding whether to bring an antitrust action?

Would you please elaborate on your statement "there will not be political influence in the [antitrust enforcement] process"?

Traditionally, the White House has not been involved in antitrust enforcement decisions. In your view, should the President have any communication about or involvement in antitrust cases?

Specifically, do you believe the President should ever recommend an enforcement decision?
As Attorney General, how would you handle potential White House attempts to influence antitrust decision-making?

As Attorney General, how will you protect the integrity of the Antitrust Division's prosecutorial function from inappropriate influences?

Thank you for your attention to these additional questions.

Source