Judge Tosses Consumer Lawsuit Over Paramount-Warner Merger
Get the Culture newsletter
Daily culture — film, music, books, the trends and ideas worth your attention. Free.
- Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín dismissed the consumer lawsuit challenging the $111 billion Paramount-Warner Bros. merger, finding the three current and two prospective Paramount+ subscribers lacked standing and failed to show "cognizable" economic harm.
- The judge wrote that the complaint contained "boilerplate assertion of competitive harms," such as "lower quality and variety" and "decreased consumer choice," without facts showing how those harms would materialize — but allowed plaintiffs to revise and refile.
- Martínez-Olguín will also preside over the separate antitrust cases brought by 12 state attorneys general and the Writers Guild of America, both set for trial on March 2, 2027.
- Paramount-Skydance CEO David Ellison published a New York Times op-ed arguing the state AGs' real concern is not market consolidation but CNN — which he would control if the merger goes through — citing his ties to President Trump and recent "60 Minutes" turmoil as sources of Hollywood anxiety.
- Ellison pledged in the op-ed that he "does not aspire" to bend newsrooms to his views, calling for CNN to remain "based on facts and truth" as he sought to neutralize the editorial-independence argument against the deal.
Why it matters: The dismissal is procedural, not fatal — plaintiffs can refile, and the $111 billion merger still faces a March 2, 2027 trial brought by 12 state attorneys general and the Writers Guild before the same judge. Ellison's CNN-defense op-ed shows the merger's biggest political liability isn't market share but the prospect of a Trump-aligned owner controlling a cable news giant.
Ask SkimNews
