SAN FRANCISCO — A coalition of 12 Democratic attorneys general led by California filed a lawsuit on Monday seeking to block the $110 billion merger between Warner Bros. Discovery and Paramount Skydance. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, argues the deal would violate federal antitrust law by substantially reducing competition in the film and television industries.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta said the proposed transaction would combine two of Hollywood’s five largest film distributors and two of the nation’s five biggest owners of basic cable channels. “The unlawful merger of these two entertainment behemoths would lead to higher prices, lower quality, and less content for film and television, harming movie theaters, basic cable distributors, and ultimately, audiences on every sofa and movie theater seat in the U.S.,” Bonta said in a statement.

The complaint alleges the combined company would control nearly one-third of the U.S. theatrical film distribution market and almost one-third of the nation’s basic cable programming. According to the attorneys general, the merger would give the new entity about 27% of the wide-release theatrical film market, more than 30% of anticipated blockbuster releases, and roughly 27% of the basic cable programming market. The lawsuit states that after the merger, only three distributors would control roughly 75% of wide-release theatrical films, while four companies would account for about 86% of such releases. Additionally, four studios would control more than 90% of anticipated top-grossing films in the blockbuster market.

Bonta emphasized broader cultural consequences beyond pricing. “Consolidation here not only leads to higher prices — it also leads to fewer opportunities for important stories to come to life, and fewer ways for audiences to encounter stories, ideas, and perspectives beyond their own experiences,” he said. He added, “In this country, no one is above the law. With this lawsuit, California and our sister states are fighting for free and fair markets, not rigged markets. America has no kings in government or our economy.”

The coalition includes the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, and Washington. The group stated it will seek a temporary restraining order if Warner Bros. Discovery and Paramount Skydance move to finalize the merger before the court rules.

Paramount has defended the deal, arguing it would preserve jobs and keep both the Paramount and Warner Bros. studio lots operating in California. The company also stated the merger would better position the combined entity to compete against streaming giants such as Netflix, Amazon, and Disney, and benefit consumers by creating a stronger competitor. David Ellison, CEO of Paramount Skydance, has promised the combined company will release at least 30 films a year. Company executives have projected the combination would generate billions of dollars in annual cost savings through operational efficiencies.

The proposed merger would unite major entertainment brands including Warner Bros. Pictures, HBO Max, CNN, Discovery’s cable networks, Paramount Pictures, CBS, MTV, Nickelodeon, and franchises such as “Mission: Impossible,” “Top Gun,” “Batman,” and “Harry Potter.” Advisers close to Ellison encouraged him to consider relocating Paramount’s headquarters and shifting as much as $30 billion in planned content spending outside California if the state sued to stop the merger. Paramount signed a lease last year for a nearly 300,000-square-foot studio space in Bayonne, New Jersey.

Federal antitrust regulators concluded their review after Ellison met with Justice Department officials, and the Trump Department of Justice approved the acquisition in June without requiring asset sales or behavioral conditions. Jeffrey Kessler, attorney for Paramount, called the legal challenge baseless. “This type of challenge doesn’t make much sense,” Kessler said in an interview. He added, “From California’s standpoint, the deal is going to lead to more production and to better jobs and more jobs for talent in California and elsewhere.”

Why It Matters

The lawsuit invokes concerns under the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914, which aims to prevent anticompetitive practices in their incipiency. If successful, the legal action could halt one of the largest media consolidations in recent history, preserving market diversity in an industry already dominated by a few major players. The outcome may set a precedent for how state coalitions challenge federally approved mergers they deem harmful to consumers and competition.