California and eleven other states have asked a federal judge to temporarily halt the Paramount–Warner Bros. merger while a separate antitrust lawsuit against the deal works through court. In a motion filed the evening of July 13, the states asked the judge to rule by July 22, the date Paramount has told them it plans to close the transaction.
The request follows a lawsuit the states filed earlier that same Monday. That suit alleges the $111 billion deal between Paramount and Warner Bros. violates federal antitrust law across three markets: wide-release theatrical distribution, blockbuster film distribution, and basic cable TV distribution. As a result, the states argue, the combined company would gain enough control over each market to raise prices and reduce output, hurting consumers, theater owners, and cable and satellite providers alike.
“The Transaction will eliminate competition between Paramount and Warner Bros. and enable the combined entity to raise prices and reduce output,” the motion states. “Plaintiff States have an interest in enforcing antitrust laws and their citizens face the risk of profound and irreversible injury in the absence of an injunction.”
Paramount Skydance pushes back on the merger challenge
Paramount Skydance responded quickly, calling the states’ position “fundamentally flawed” on both the facts and the law. The company said further delay would hurt entertainment workers rather than protect them, and it intends to keep pushing toward a July 22 close.
“Delaying this transaction will only harm entertainment workers who have already suffered over recent years as technology has disrupted their livelihood and cost California tens of thousands of entertainment jobs,” the company said in a statement.
What states must prove to block the Paramount Warner Bros merger
To win the injunction, the states must convince the judge the underlying case has a reasonable chance of success and that they would suffer irreparable harm if the deal closes first. Their filing argues that letting the merger proceed, only to have a court later rule it unlawful, would leave no way to undo the damage. The states describe it as trying to “unscramble the egg” after the fact.
California‘s attorney general office signaled the move on Monday, saying it would pursue an injunction if Paramount refused to pause the merger voluntarily while the case is pending. The company did not agree, prompting the filing that evening.
“These titans of industry must not move to merge until a court properly evaluates our claims,” California Attorney General Rob Bonta said in a statement Monday evening. “Today, alongside a coalition of attorneys general, I’ve filed an emergency motion asking the court to immediately stop this merger. I will not let Warner Bros. and Paramount merge without a fight.”
A Nexstar-Tegna precedent looms over the case
The ruling on the injunction will offer an early read on how courts view the states’ broader case. In March, a similar coalition of attorneys general won an order blocking the Nexstar-Tegna merger from taking effect while that antitrust dispute played out. That ruling is now on appeal, meaning neither side yet has a final answer on how much weight courts will give state-led challenges to media mergers. Its outcome could still shape how judges weigh the Paramount Warner Bros. request in the weeks ahead.