12 States Sue to Block $111B Paramount-Warner Merger
Get the Culture newsletter
Daily culture — film, music, books, the trends and ideas worth your attention. Free.
- A coalition of 12 states filed suit on July 13 to block the $111 billion Paramount-Warner Bros. merger, arguing the combined entity would control 30% of the market for "anticipated top-grossing films."
- California AG Rob Bonta is leading the case, leaning on a 1986 9th Circuit ruling (AMC v. Syufy) that found audiences won't substitute art films for blockbusters — the court noted "if the price for admission to 'E.T.' goes up, audiences will not flock to 'My Dinner With Andre.'"
- The DOJ has already approved the deal, leaving the states to fund the fight alone — a tab that could hit $20 million, with California securing an extra $14 million in May for antitrust enforcement.
- David Ellison is financing the merger with $40 billion from his father Larry Ellison, who gave $45 million toward Trump's 2024 reelection — a connection Bonta highlighted at the press conference while noting he has sued the Trump administration more than 70 times.
- Hollywood Teamsters head Lindsay Dougherty said unions want "assurances, and...penalties tied to that," expressing skepticism of Paramount's claim that the deal will produce more shows and movies than the two companies would independently.
- Paramount has called the lawsuit "fundamentally flawed" and retained Jeffrey Kessler, Eric Stock, and Andrew Finch as litigators, with Kessler arguing the combination is "pro-competitive" and "really needed for the whole industry."
Why it matters: The suit puts 12 states in the rare position of challenging a DOJ-approved merger, with California alone committing an extra $14 million and the coalition potentially spending $20 million on outside experts. If the states prevail, the $111 billion deal collapses and Hollywood unions — already distrustful of Paramount's promises — gain leverage to demand binding conditions rather than voluntary assurances.
