Gail Slater Faces Senate Questions on Antitrust Priorities, Big Tech and Drug Prices

Gail Slater, President Trump's nominee to be assistant attorney general for antitrust, told the Senate Judiciary Committee she would work to “apply the antitrust laws vigorously and fairly with clear rules of the road for all,” and senators from both parties pressed her on enforcement priorities including big tech litigation, prescription drug costs and merger remedies.

Why it matters: The assistant attorney general for the Antitrust Division leads DOJ’s civil and criminal antitrust enforcement. The hearing canvassed how the division will handle ongoing high-profile cases, whether it has sufficient resources, and how it will coordinate with state attorneys general and the Federal Trade Commission.

Representative Mike Simpson introduced Slater and described her work in both the public and private sectors. Slater described a career spanning private practice, a decade at the Federal Trade Commission, two tours in government at the National Economic Council and as a Senate economic policy advisor, and recent work for technology-sector clients. She said the Sherman Act has long served as Congress’s backstop to preserve competitive markets and referenced bipartisan roots for antitrust enforcement.

Several senators asked Slater whether the Antitrust Division would continue major pending cases, particularly those involving large technology platforms. She said she planned to read into open litigation promptly, meet with career staff and “take it from there,” and noted that resource constraints are a practical consideration for complex civil antitrust litigation. Senator Amy Klobuchar, whose panel has worked on merger fees and division resources, pressed Slater to continue efforts to secure adequate funding; Slater pledged to advocate for resources if confirmed.

Senators from both parties raised consumer-price topics. Senator Richard Blumenthal focused on farm and food-industry concentration and rising grocery costs; Slater said she would consider consolidation and supply shocks (for example, avian flu affecting egg supplies) when deciding enforcement priorities. Multiple senators asked about the effect of concentration in technology markets on speech and access. Slater agreed that when markets become highly concentrated, private suppression of speech and deplatforming become easier and that antitrust enforcement can help by restoring competition.

Slater told senators she would coordinate with the FTC and state attorneys general; she pointed to the merger-filing-fees modernization law as a recent step increasing resources for enforcement. She told Senator Klobuchar that robust remedies such as divestitures, if well-crafted, can preserve competition without “blowing up” deals that could otherwise be pro-competitive.

On pharmaceuticals and pharmacy benefit managers, Slater said she was concerned about rising prescription costs and industry consolidation; she cited consolidation among several large companies and suggested the Antitrust Division should examine anti-competitive practices across the sector.

Context and supporting details: Slater received a letter of support from nine former heads of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division, which senators cited during the hearing. The nominee emphasized a technocratic enforcement approach—enforcement where the evidence of anti-competitive conduct shows harm to consumers—while acknowledging administration priorities and resource trade-offs.

The committee did not vote at the hearing. Senators asked for follow-up documents and pressed for commitments on resource advocacy, continued pursuit of ongoing litigation where warranted, and close coordination with state enforcers and the FTC.