Block the Merger groups ask court to reject Paramount-WBD settlement
Five advocacy groups have asked a federal court in California to throw out a settlement that would let Paramount Skydance buy Warner Bros. Discovery for $110 billion.
The request arrived as an amicus brief, a filing by outside groups with an interest in a case, on 25 September. It urges Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín to reject the consent decree, a court-approved settlement, outright. Variety
The brief was filed under the Block the Merger banner by Free Press, the Committee for the First Amendment, the Freedom of the Press Foundation, the Future Film Coalition and the International Documentary Association. The League of United Latin American Citizens, known as LULAC, filed a separate brief also opposing the settlement.
The judge had authorised interested parties to file such briefs by 12:01 a.m. PT on 25 September. That order followed an emergency motion from the Block the Merger groups seeking leave to be heard. The deadline will not be extended, and a hearing to consider approval of the settlement was scheduled for that same morning. Deadline
The settlement at issue was struck between the two companies and 12 state attorneys general. Those states had filed a federal antitrust lawsuit, a competition-law action, on 13 July 2026 seeking to block the merger. The agreement was meant to clear a major legal hurdle for the deal. Reuters
As reported on 21 September, the terms include independent editorial boards for CNN and CBS. They also include a $30 million penalty per film for any shortfall against agreed film commitments.
The coalition says that is not enough. It argues the decree fails to address harms to competition, creativity and independent journalism from the combination. It also argues the deal would not prevent price rises, because nothing stops Paramount from leveraging CBS or HBO to demand higher fees. Free Press
Free Press announced the filing in a press release on 25 September. The headline called the Paramount settlement “pitiful.”
California Attorney General Rob Bonta led the July action to stop the merger. He had said he would not accept behavioural remedies, promises about future conduct rather than structural changes such as sales of assets.
The merger timetable has now slipped while the judge weighs the challenges. For viewers, this matters because the case decides who controls a large stable of channels, films and streaming libraries, and who sets their release windows. What makes this stand out is the line-up of opponents, from press-freedom campaigners to documentary makers to a Latino civil-rights organisation, all arguing the same settlement leaves creators and audiences unprotected.
