Paramount swats away shareholder lawsuit over Warner Bros Discovery merger, denies any CNN coverage pledge
Paramount’s merger bid is under siege as a shareholder lawsuit and a federal antitrust suit from a 12-state coalition threaten to stall—or even derail—the deal.
Paramount is trying to push a $110 billion merger with Warner Bros. Discovery while swatting away lawsuits from just about every direction. The latest: the company asked a judge to toss a shareholder suit that says executives quietly bargained away CNN’s editorial independence to grease the skids with regulators. Yes, it is exactly as messy as it sounds.
The shareholder suit, the CNN angle, and who’s being accused
The case sits in Delaware’s Chancery Court and comes from shareholder Paul Robbins, with support from advocacy groups including the Freedom of the Press Foundation. Robbins is going after CEO David Ellison, Larry Ellison, and the board, alleging breach of fiduciary duty. The claim: Paramount’s leadership tried to curry favor with the Trump administration by signaling a willingness to reshape CNN’s coverage, and also improperly settled a prior lawsuit involving CBS’s 60 Minutes. Robbins frames it as trading editorial independence for regulatory help while the company pursued its Warner Bros. Discovery tie-up.
Paramount’s response: denial across the board
Paramount is not having it. A company spokesperson said the studio has made no promises to any state or federal officials about CNN or any other newsroom, beyond a general commitment to fact-based reporting. They also called the bribery chatter 'recycled' and said all contacts with government officials around deals — including the Skydance- Paramount transaction in summer 2025 — followed anti-bribery laws. And on the merger itself, the studio’s line hasn’t changed: this thing stands on its 'economic merits,' should give consumers more choice, and create a sturdier financial base for both journalism and filmmaking.
Meanwhile, labor and states are trying to block the merger
It’s not just shareholders. Hollywood ’s writers and a coalition of states are in court trying to stop the deal. The Writers Guild of America filed an antitrust suit arguing the combined company would shrink competition, reduce jobs, and scare off investment across film and TV. The guild is also skeptical of executive talk that the merged studio would keep a steady pipeline of 15 theatrical releases a year, warning that the debt load would pressure leadership to cut back instead.
'With fewer competitors, a merged Paramount/WB entity would have both the incentive & ability to lower costs by suppressing writers' wages & reducing output.'
On top of that, 12 State Attorneys General led by California’s Rob Bonta have filed a parallel federal antitrust case targeting the same merger.
Where the pressure is coming from, in one glance
- Shareholder derivative suit (Delaware): Paul Robbins, backed by groups including Freedom of the Press Foundation, alleges Paramount leadership bargained over CNN’s coverage and mishandled a 60 Minutes legal matter while advancing the Warner Bros. Discovery deal; Paramount moved to dismiss and denies all of it.
- Writers Guild of America antitrust suit: argues the merger would suppress wages, reduce output, and deter investment; questions the promised 15-films-per-year pipeline.
- State AG coalition: 12 Attorneys General, led by California AG Rob Bonta, filed a federal antitrust lawsuit to block the merger.
The clock and the stakes
Between the shareholder case, the WGA’s challenge, and the state AG lawsuit, regulatory scrutiny is only getting heavier. That adds fresh uncertainty to both the timeline and the final approval of the proposed merger.