Paramount’s lead trial counsel says Warner Bros. Discovery merger still set to close by late September amid antitrust suit and Supreme Court appeal

Warner Bros. Discovery and Paramount’s planned merger is still on track for a scheduled closing before the end of September, Paramount’s lead trial counsel said after a new antitrust lawsuit filed by multiple states challenged the transaction. In remarks reported by CNBC, Jeffrey Kessler, Paramount’s lead trial counsel, said the companies’ plan remained to close “this quarter” and finish the deal “before the end of September,” despite the legal fight now underway.

The new lawsuit was filed Monday by the attorneys general of California and New York along with 10 other states, alleging anticompetitive conduct tied to the consolidation of major entertainment properties and distribution leverage. The complaint adds another layer of litigation to a deal that has already faced regulatory and legal scrutiny as the media industry restructures around streaming and bundling.

Kessler’s comments underscore that Paramount views the lawsuit as part of an ongoing process rather than a shutdown report, even as the merger faces scrutiny from state enforcers. According to the reporting, the executive focus is on maintaining the company’s closing timeline while the case proceeds through federal court.

The Deadline report also describes a parallel procedural development involving a Supreme Court appeal that remains in play. Rather than describing the appeal’s details, Kessler’s posture as relayed by CNBC was that the companies can still proceed on the established schedule despite continued challenges at different legal levels.

The companies’ ability to close by late September depends on how quickly courts resolve motions and whether any interim relief is ordered that would constrain the transaction. Antitrust cases frequently turn on requests for temporary injunctions, which can affect whether mergers can complete while litigation continues.

If the deal closes on time, it would reshape control of film and television production and the broader catalog available to platforms and distributors. For viewers and pay-TV and streaming customers, the immediate practical impact would be the merger’s downstream effect on programming ownership and licensing, as well as how major studios negotiate carriage and distribution terms.

For state and federal stakeholders, the dispute also raises questions about institutional accountability and how antitrust enforcement timelines interact with deal schedules. A Supreme Court appeal pending alongside a multistate action could further slow or alter the path of the merger’s legal resolution, with potential consequences for future media consolidation and for the resources required by public agencies to oversee large transactions.