Attorney General Bonta Secures Court Decision Allowing States to Participate in Evaluation of Allegedly Corrupt HPE/Juniper Merger

OAKLAND — California Attorney General Rob Bonta today released the following statement in response to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California allowing California and 12 other attorneys general to intervene in the allegedly corrupt U.S. Department of Justice (U.S. DOJ) settlement of the $14 billion Hewitt Packard Enterprises (HPE)/Juniper Networks merger while the merits of that settlement are evaluated by a judge. Today’s order allows the attorneys general to participate directly in the court's proceedings to evaluate whether that settlement is in the public interest. Without the states’ intervention, the only participants in the investigation into the settlement would have been those who support the settlement, and the court would hear a one-sided argument. 

“Last month, amid allegations of backroom dealings, California and our sister states asked the court to allow us to intervene in the HPE/Juniper merger, approved by U.S. DOJ. We are pleased that the court has granted our motion and are ready to step in and stand up for fairness, transparency, and the integrity of government — ensuring that the public interest, not private influence, guides the outcome,” said Attorney General Bonta. "This is about more than one merger; this case raises serious questions about the integrity of government processes. Antitrust enforcement exists to protect consumers and ensure fair markets, not to reward politically connected companies — let's find out if that was the case here.”

BACKGROUND

According to public reports, U.S. DOJ trial staff working on the merger case, as well as senior leadership in the Antitrust Division, opposed the HPE/Juniper settlement and had initially sued to stop it. But higher-level political appointees at U.S. DOJ were lobbied by individuals with close ties to the Trump Administration. The Chief of Staff to the U.S. Attorney General then allegedly pushed the settlement through over the objections of the Antitrust Division and in a manner that did not address the anticompetitive harms alleged in the government’s complaint. Two senior Antitrust Division attorneys appointed by the Trump Administration were allegedly fired for opposing the settlement. And, most concerning of all, U.S. DOJ’s merger settlement failed to address the anticompetitive harms outlined in the DOJ’s own complaint against the merger.  

Attorney General Bonta has opposed U.S. DOJ’s abrupt settlement of this merger, and in October asked the court to both allow California and other states to participate directly in the investigative proceedings and to order the companies to stop merging while the investigation into the merits of the merger proceeds.