A casual round of golf at Mar-a-Lago has torpedoed the Justice Department's efforts to prosecute a major entertainment executive and undermined its broader campaign against inflated concert ticket prices. President Donald Trump, 79, issued a full pardon to entertainment businessman Tim Leiweke on Thursday, just three weeks after former GOP Representative Trey Gowdy raised his client's case during their 16 November golf outing, according to the Wall Street Journal.
The pardon wipes away what prosecutors described as an 'airtight' case against Leiweke, 68, who faced charges of rigging the bidding process for a $375 million (£297 million) basketball arena at the University of Texas in 2018. Beyond destroying the criminal prosecution, Trump's decision also cripples a separate Department of Justice (DOJ) civil lawsuit aimed at breaking up monopolistic practices in the live entertainment sector that have driven up ticket costs for consumers.
The Mar-a-Lago Intervention
Federal prosecutors accused Leiweke of orchestrating a scheme with a company co-founded by Dallas Cowboys owner Jerry Jones of Legends Hospitality. The indictment alleged that Leiweke promised Legends lucrative subcontracts for concessions and merchandise at a new basketball arena at the University of Texas. In exchange, Legends agreed not to compete in the main bidding process. This allowed Leiweke's Oak View Group to secure the contract uncontested.
Irving Azoff, the Live Nation CEO who co-founded Oak View Group alongside Leiweke, reportedly served as the go-between for the arrangement. The Justice Department granted Azoff immunity in exchange for his testimony, isolating Leiweke as the sole defendant.
Gowdy, a former federal prosecutor who boasts a 3.4 handicap, used his time on the Mar-a-Lago golf course to argue that his client was receiving unfair treatment compared to Azoff. The Fox News host pushed Trump to intervene with the DOJ, requesting a non-prosecution agreement similar to what Azoff received. After weeks of consideration, the President went further than Gowdy's original request and issued a complete pardon.
'I am extremely grateful that the President allowed me to raise that issue with him, and he is the president, and whatever decision was made after that, he was elected to make, I was not,' Gowdy told the Journal, whilst maintaining he never explicitly sought a pardon. The White House defended the decision, stating: 'President Trump is the final decider on any pardon or commutation and is exercising his constitutional authority to issue them as he deems necessary.'
Implications for Anti-trust Enforcement
The pardon arrives at a sensitive moment for the live entertainment industry. Trump's executive order in March 2025 promised action against price gouging, but the directive focused on ticket scalpers rather than corporations accused of monopolistic practices. The Justice Department's 2024 antitrust lawsuit against Live Nation and Ticketmaster represents the government's only significant legal challenge to anti-competitive behaviour in the concert and sporting event industries.
Prosecutors had planned to leverage Leiweke's criminal indictment to compel his testimony in the broader antitrust case against Live Nation. With the pardon now in place, Leiweke's legal team has indicated he will refuse to cooperate with federal investigators, citing his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination until a judge formally dismisses his case. This removes a key witness from the government's arsenal, significantly weakening its ability to prove a pattern of anti-competitive conduct by the ticketing giant.
Golf Course Diplomacy and Clemency
Gowdy's relationship with Trump extends beyond their November encounter. The former congressman appeared on Fox News in August to praise the President's golfing abilities, claiming Trump 'hit every fairway' and demonstrated impressive driving distance.
The Leiweke pardon adds to a growing list of controversial clemency grants during Trump's second term. So far, the list includes pardons for political allies and business executives facing federal charges. Critics argue the case illustrates how the President's personal connections and social circle can override career prosecutors' judgement. And these golf course decisions can potentially undermine the independence of the DOJ.
