The head of the Justice Department’s antitrust unit said Thursday she is leaving the role, effective immediately, at a critical moment for corporate mergers in America.

Gail Slater, the assistant attorney general in charge of the Antitrust Division, wrote on X: ‘It is with great sadness and abiding hope that I leave my role as AAG for Antitrust today.’

Slater continued, ‘It was indeed the honor of a lifetime to serve in this role. Huge thanks to all who supported me this past year, most especially the men and women of’ the Department.

The White House referred questions to the Justice Department.

Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement, “On behalf of the Department of Justice, we thank Gail Slater for her service to the Antitrust Division which works to protect consumers, promote affordability, and expand economic opportunity.”

Slater is leaving just as media giants Netflix and Paramount Skydance battle for control of Warner Bros. Discovery.

President Donald Trump had said he was going to get involved in reviewing whichever Warner Bros. deal proceeds, an uncommon occurrence in antitrust matters.

But in an interview with NBC News, Trump slightly changed his tune. ‘I’ve been called by both sides, it’s the two sides, but I’ve decided I shouldn’t be involved,’ he said.

‘The Justice Department will handle it.’

Trump has met with executives from both of Warner Bros.’ bidders.

The Justice Department will also head to court in weeks in a bid to challenge concert venue manager Live Nation’s ownership of Ticketmaster.

Shares of Live Nation jumped as much as 5.8% after Slater announced her departure. By 1 p.m. ET, the rally had abated to around 2.5%.

When the Senate confirmed Slater, 78 senators from both sides of the aisle voted in her favor. Only 19 opposed her confirmation.

This week, her deputy in the Antitrust Division also departed.

Mark Hamer, deputy assistant attorney general for the Antitrust Division, wrote on LinkedIn, ‘Decided the time is right for me to return to private practice.’ He praised Slater as a ‘leader of exceptional wisdom, strength and integrity.’

CHICAGO — Cardi B was part of Bad Bunny’s Super Bowl halftime show. What she did exactly, well, that turned into a perplexing question for two major prediction markets.

At least one Kalshi trader filed a complaint with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission over how the prediction market handled Sunday’s appearance by the Grammy-winning rapper. The result of a similar event contract on Polymarket also drew the ire of some users on that platform.

Prediction markets provide an opportunity to trade — or wager — on the result of future events. The markets are comprised of typically yes-or-no questions called event contracts, with the prices connected to what traders are willing to pay, which theoretically indicates the perceived probability of an event occurring.

The buy-in for each contract ranges from $0 to $1 each, reflecting a 0% to 100% chance of what traders think could happen.

More than $47.3 million was wagered on Kalshi’s market for “ Who will perform at the Big Game? ” A Polymarket contract had more than $10 million in volume.

Cardi B joined singers Karol G and Young Miko and actors Jessica Alba and Pedro Pascal on a starry front porch during the halftime spectacle. She danced to the music, but it was unclear whether she was singing along during the show, which included performances by Ricky Martin and Lady Gaga.

Due to “ambiguity over whether or not Cardi B’s attendance at the 2026 Super Bowl halftime show constituted a qualifying ‘performance,’” Kalshi cited one of its rules in settling the market at the last price before trading was paused: $0.74 for No holders and $0.26 for Yes holders. The platform returned all the money to its users.

Polymarket’s contract was resolved as Cardi B had performed, but the yes was disputed. A final decision on the contract is expected to be announced on Wednesday.

In the CFTC complaint — first reported by the Event Horizon newsletter and posted by Front Office Sports — the trader alleges that Kalshi violated the Commodity Exchange Act with how it resolved the Cardi B contract. The trader — a Yes holder — is seeking $3,700.

A CFTC spokesman declined comment on Wednesday.

The Super Bowl capped a big NFL season for prediction markets.

Kalshi reported a daily record high of more than $1 billion in total trading volume on the day of the game, an increase of more than 2,700% compared to last year’s Super Bowl. The season-long total for all Super Bowl winner futures was $828.6 million, up more than 2,000% from last year.

The increased activity on Sunday caused some deposit issues. Kalshi co-founder Luana Lopes Lara posted on X on Monday that the “traffic spike was way bigger than our most optimistic forecasts.” She said the platform had reimbursed processing fees on the effected deposits and added credits to users who experienced delays.

Robinhood Markets highlighted the strength of its prediction markets when it announced its financial results for the fourth quarter and full 2025 on Tuesday.

“I think we are just at the beginning of a prediction market super cycle that could drive trillions in annual volume over time,” CEO Vlad Tenev said during an earnings call. “This year is going to be a big year. Olympics are going on right now. World Cup coming in the summer.”

The operator of roughly 180 Eddie Bauer stores across the U.S. and Canada has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, blaming declining sales and a litany of other industry headwinds.

The bankruptcy filing marks the third time in a little over two decades for the storied-but-now-tired brand that began as a Seattle fishing shop, later outfitted the first American to climb Mount Everest and made thousands of newfangled down jackets and sleeping bags for the military during World War II.

Eddie Bauer LLC said Monday it had entered into a restructuring pact with its secured lenders as it made the filing in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey.

Most Eddie Bauer retail and outlet stores in the U.S. and Canada will remain open as the company winds down certain locations. It noted that it will conduct a court-supervised sales process, and if a sale can’t be executed, it will begin a wind-down of its U.S. and Canadian operations.

“This is not an easy decision,” said Marc Rosen, CEO of Catalyst Brands, which maintains the license to operate Eddie Bauer stores in the U.S. and Canada. “However, this restructuring is the best way to optimize value for the retail company’s stakeholders and also ensure Catalyst Brands remains profitable and with strong liquidity and cash flow.”

Eddie Bauer’s stores outside of the U.S. and Canada are operated by other licensees, are not included in the Chapter 11 filings, and will stay open, according to the release.

Authentic Brands Group continues to own the intellectual property associated with the Eddie Bauer brand and may license the brand to other operators, the company said. The operations of other brands in the Catalyst Brands portfolio are not affected by this filing and will continue in the normal course, according to the company.

Eddie Bauer’s e-commerce and wholesale operations will also not be impacted by the wind down, as they are operated by a company called Outdoor 5, LLC. That was a transition it made in January and became effective Feb. 2.

Eddie Bauer joins a growing list of U.S. retailers this year that are closing stores, as companies reorganize under bankruptcy protection or pare down their operations to focus on the most profitable businesses.

The parent company of Saks Fifth Avenue said last month that it was seeking bankruptcy protection, buffeted by rising competition and the massive debt it took on to buy its rival in the luxury sector, Neiman Marcus, just over a year ago. A few days later, the parent company said it was closing most of its Saks Off 5th stores.

Amazon said earlier this month that it was closing almost all of its Amazon Go and Amazon Fresh locations within days as it narrows its focus on food delivery and its grocery chain, Whole Foods Market.

Eddie Bauer’s namesake founder — an avid outdoorsman — started the company in Seattle in 1920 as Bauer’s Sports Shop, according to the brand’s website. In 1945, after making more than 50,000 jackets for the military, it launched a mail-order catalog.

“Bauer’s Sports Shop was not just a place where people purchased clothing and gear, it was a community hub where folks gathered to share their wisdom, learn, and talk about their experiences in the outdoors,” the website says.

The company created an American goose-down insulated jacket, known as the “Skyliner,” in 1936, and it became the company’s first patented jacket. It also outfitted the first American to climb Mount Everest — James W. Whittaker — with an Eddie Bauer parka in 1963.

After Bauer retired in 1968 and sold the business to his partner, the outdoor brand shifted more toward casual apparel and was bought by General Mills Inc. in 1971 and then by Spiegel Inc. in 1988. After Spiegel filed for bankruptcy in 2003 and most of its assets were sold, the remainder of the company was reorganized in 2005 as Eddie Bauer Holdings Inc.

In June 2009, Eddie Bauer filed bankruptcy and was acquired by Golden State Capital, the following month. In 2021, it was acquired by Authentic Brands and SPARC Group LLC.

A year ago, Catalyst was formed by the merger of SPARC and JCPenney, which Simon Property Group and fellow mall landlord Brookfield bought out of bankruptcy.

Rosen noted that even prior to the inception of Catalyst Brands last year, Eddie Bauer was in a “challenged situation.”

“Over the past year, these challenges have been exacerbated by various headwinds, including increased costs of doing business due to inflation, ongoing tariff uncertainty, and other factors,” he said.

He noted that while Catalyst’s leadership was able to make improvements in product development and marketing, those changes could not be implemented fast enough to fully address the problems created over several years.

Eddie Bauer had nearly 600 stores at its peak in 2001, according to CoStar Group Inc., a commercial real estate data firm.

In a note published earlier this month, Neil Saunders, managing director of GlobalData Retail, wrote that while the Eddie Bauer name is “well known,” the brand hasn’t kept pace with rivals like Swedish outdoor brand Fjallraven and Canadian label Arc’teryx. He also cited issues with quality deteriorating, which, for an outdoor brand measured by the performance of its products, is very problematic.

“And for many younger shoppers, the brand is seen as somewhat old-fashioned and a bit irrelevant,” he said.

LOS ANGELES — The world’s biggest social media companies face several landmark trials this year that seek to hold them responsible for harms to children who use their platforms. Opening statements for the first, in Los Angeles County Superior Court, begin this week.

Instagram’s parent company Meta and Google’s YouTube will face claims that their platforms deliberately addict and harm children. TikTok and Snap, which were originally named in the lawsuit, settled for undisclosed sums.

“This was only the first case — there are hundreds of parents and school districts in the social media addiction trials that start today, and sadly, new families every day who are speaking out and bringing Big Tech to court for its deliberately harmful products,” said Sacha Haworth, executive director of the nonprofit Tech Oversight Project.

At the core of the case is a 19-year-old identified only by the initials “KGM,” whose case could determine how thousands of other, similar lawsuits against social media companies will play out. She and two other plaintiffs have been selected for bellwether trials — essentially test cases for both sides to see how their arguments play out before a jury and what damages, if any, may be awarded, said Clay Calvert, a nonresident senior fellow of technology policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute.

It’s the first time the companies will argue their case before a jury, and the outcome could have profound effects on their businesses and how they will handle children using their platforms.

KGM claims that her use of social media from an early age addicted her to the technology and exacerbated depression and suicidal thoughts. Importantly, the lawsuit claims that this was done through deliberate design choices made by companies that sought to make their platforms more addictive to children to boost profits. This argument, if successful, could sidestep the companies’ First Amendment shield and Section 230, which protects tech companies from liability for material posted on their platforms.

“Borrowing heavily from the behavioral and neurobiological techniques used by slot machines and exploited by the cigarette industry, Defendants deliberately embedded in their products an array of design features aimed at maximizing youth engagement to drive advertising revenue,” the lawsuit says.

Executives, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, are expected to testify at the trial, which will last six to eight weeks. Experts have drawn similarities to the Big Tobacco trials that led to a 1998 settlement requiring cigarette companies to pay billions in health care costs and restrict marketing targeting minors.

“Plaintiffs are not merely the collateral damage of Defendants’ products,” the lawsuit says. “They are the direct victims of the intentional product design choices made by each Defendant. They are the intended targets of the harmful features that pushed them into self-destructive feedback loops.”

The tech companies dispute the claims that their products deliberately harm children, citing a bevy of safeguards they have added over the years and arguing that they are not liable for content posted on their sites by third parties.

“Recently, a number of lawsuits have attempted to place the blame for teen mental health struggles squarely on social media companies,” Meta said in a recent blog post. “But this oversimplifies a serious issue. Clinicians and researchers find that mental health is a deeply complex and multifaceted issue, and trends regarding teens’ well-being aren’t clear-cut or universal. Narrowing the challenges faced by teens to a single factor ignores the scientific research and the many stressors impacting young people today, like academic pressure, school safety, socio-economic challenges and substance abuse.”

A Meta spokesperson said in a recent statement that the company strongly disagrees with the allegations outlined in the lawsuit and that it’s “confident the evidence will show our longstanding commitment to supporting young people.”

José Castañeda, a Google Spokesperson, said that the allegations against YouTube are “simply not true.” In a statement, he said, “Providing young people with a safer, healthier experience has always been core to our work.”

The case will be the first in a slew of cases beginning this year that seek to hold social media companies responsible for harming children’s mental well-being.

In New Mexico, opening statements begin Monday for trial on allegations that Meta and its social media platforms have failed to protect young users from sexual exploitation, following an undercover online investigation. Attorney General Raúl Torrez in late 2023 sued Meta and Zuckerberg, who was later dropped from the suit.

Prosecutors have said that New Mexico is not seeking to hold Meta accountable for its content but rather its role in pushing out that content through complex algorithms that proliferate material that can be harmful, saying they uncovered internal documents in which Meta employees estimate that about 100,000 children every day are subjected to sexual harassment on the company’s platforms.

Meta denies the civil charges while accusing Torrez of cherry-picking select documents and making “sensationalist” arguments. The company says it has consulted with parents and law enforcement to introduce built-in protections to social media accounts, along with settings and tools for parents.

A federal bellwether trial beginning in June in Oakland, California, will be the first to represent school districts that have sued social media platforms over harms to children.

In addition, more than 40 state attorneys general have filed lawsuits against Meta, claiming it is harming young people and contributing to the youth mental health crisis by deliberately designing features on Instagram and Facebook that addict children to its platforms. The majority of cases filed their lawsuits in federal court, but some sued in their respective states.

TikTok also faces similar lawsuits in more than a dozen states.

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission said Wednesday that it is investigating Nike for allegedly discriminating against white workers.

The agency that polices discrimination in the workplace filed an action in federal court in Missouri to compel the publicly traded athletic shoe and apparel giant to produce information in response to a subpoena the agency served on the company last fall, according to court filings reviewed by NBC News.

The EEOC said it was investigating allegations that the company’s mentorship and training programs and its personnel decisions gave nonwhite employees preferential treatment that amounts, according to the agency, to discrimination against white workers.

Nike is the world’s largest sportswear and apparel company, with nearly 80,000 employees and revenues of around $51.4 billion in 2024.

The allegations were not made by workers at Nike who believed they had been the targets of unfair treatment, however, as is typically the case in EEOC investigations.

Instead, the court filings show that this case stems from a commissioner’s charge brought by then-commissioner Andrea Lucas herself in May 2024, and based on publicly available information such as Nike’s own annual “Impact Reports” and information on its public website.

The EEOC’s request that a judge enforce the subpoena is the latest instance of the Trump administration using a federal agency that is typically charged with preventing and responding to discrimination against nonwhite Americans, and deploying it instead to protect what it says are the underrepresented interests of white people.

Nike has objected in court to many of the EEOC’s demands to documents over the last several months, arguing that they are vague, overly broad, and seek information dating back to well before the period in question.

“This feels like a surprising and unusual escalation,” a Nike spokesperson said. “We have had extensive, good-faith participation in an EEOC inquiry into our personnel practices, programs, and decisions and have had ongoing efforts to provide information and engage constructively with the agency.”

The spokesperson added that Nike has shared “thousands of pages of information and detailed written responses” in connection with the agency’s inquiry and said the company is in the “process of providing additional information.” Nike will respond to the agency’s petition, the spokesperson said.

Lucas was appointed chair of the EEOC by President Donald Trump in November 2025 after serving as a commissioner since 2020, when the president nominated Lucas to the agency.

The agency said it filed the subpoena enforcement action after “first attempting to obtain voluntary compliance with its investigative requests.”