•
•
•
•
•
•
•
A plain-language guide to the 12-state lawsuit, the proposed consent decree, the Tunney Act debate and what happens next
Paramount Skydance has agreed a settlement with 12 US states that sued to block its acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD), but the deal cannot take effect until a federal judge approves it, and as of 30 September 2026 she has not. At a hearing on 24 September, District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín made clear the court would not simply rubber-stamp the agreement and asked the parties to answer further questions, including a request from US Senator Cory Booker for a deeper public-interest review.
This article explains the legal issues for general information. It is not legal advice.
In July 2026, California Attorney General Rob Bonta led a coalition of 12 state attorneys general in filing an antitrust lawsuit to stop the merger of Paramount Skydance and Warner Bros. Discovery, a transaction valued at roughly $110 billion.
The states argued that combining two of Hollywood's oldest studios, along with news networks CNN and CBS News, would reduce competition in markets such as film production and distribution. The Writers Guild of America (WGA) brought a separate lawsuit against the deal.
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| July 2026 | 12 state AGs file antitrust suit to block the merger |
| August 2026 | Planned settlement talks collapse; Bonta accuses Paramount of leaking confidential information |
| 21 September 2026 | States and Paramount announce a settlement; WGA also settles |
| 22–23 September 2026 | Judge schedules a hearing and cancels a hearing on Paramount's request for a $1.88 billion bond |
| 24 September 2026 | Virtual hearing on the proposed consent decree; Senator Booker files a letter |
| 28 September 2026 | Paramount, WBD and the states file responses opposing a Tunney Act-style review |
| Pending | Court's decision on whether to enter the decree |
A consent decree is a settlement that a court formally enters as an order. Once entered, the conditions become enforceable by the court, so a company that breaks them can face contempt proceedings or other penalties. In merger cases, consent decrees usually allow a deal to proceed on conditions intended to address competition concerns, rather than blocking it outright.
Based on reporting by Deadline, Variety, Courthouse News and others, the key terms include:
The Writers Guild's settlement reportedly includes a five-year block on writer layoffs at CBS News Broadcast and a $17.5 million contribution to the guild's health fund.
At the virtual hearing, which drew about 650 online viewers, Judge Martínez-Olguín said she wanted to be satisfied that the settlement was negotiated at arm's length and not through collusion. She questioned:
A senior lawyer in California's Department of Justice told the court the states were wary of permanently blocking the deal, noting that WBD could simply seek another buyer.
The judge also allowed outside groups, including the Block the Merger coalition and LULAC, to file short amicus briefs.
Senator Cory Booker, ranking member of the Senate Judiciary antitrust subcommittee, urged the court to carry out an independent public-interest review before entering the decree. He noted that the settlement arrived without a competitive impact statement or public comment period, and asked what would protect cinemas after the rental-term protections expire.
The Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act of 1974, known as the Tunney Act, sets out how federal courts review antitrust settlements proposed by the US Department of Justice. It requires:
Congress passed it to bring transparency to antitrust settlements, which resolve the large majority of government antitrust cases.
In filings on 28 September, Paramount, WBD and the states all argued the Tunney Act does not apply because this is a settlement brought by states, not the federal government. The companies said there is no legal basis for an independent public-interest review.
The states argued the correct test is whether the decree is fair, reasonable, equitable and lawful, and pointed to Ninth Circuit precedent declining to extend Tunney Act-style public-interest review beyond federal antitrust decrees.
| Standard | What the court asks | Effect |
|---|---|---|
| Tunney Act public-interest review | Is the settlement in the public interest, after public comment? | Slower, more scrutiny, outside input |
| Ordinary consent decree review | Is it fair, reasonable, equitable and lawful, and within the scope of the case? | Faster, more deference to the parties |
If the judge applies the more deferential standard, approval could come quickly. If she requires something closer to a public-interest review, closing could be delayed.
Not fully. The companies have settled with the states and the WGA, but the settlement needs the judge's approval before the merger can close. As of 30 September 2026, no ruling had been issued.
US District Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín of the Northern District of California.
A 1974 federal law requiring public notice, a competitive impact statement, public comment and a public-interest finding before courts enter antitrust settlements proposed by the US Department of Justice.
Because the settlement was negotiated by state attorneys general, not the federal government. Whether a similar review should be applied anyway is the key open question.
An independent board to oversee adherence to journalistic standards.
No. This article explains a public legal dispute for educational purposes.
The Paramount–WBD case has moved from a battle over whether the merger should happen to a narrower but important legal question: how closely should a court scrutinise an antitrust settlement negotiated by states? Judge Martínez-Olguín's decision will determine not only when one of Hollywood's biggest deals closes, but also how future state-led merger settlements may be reviewed.
