Ray Seilie was recently featured in the Vulture article “Hollywood’s Hottest Fall Drama Is the Warnermount Merger,” where he shed light on the upcoming trial between numerous state attorneys general and Paramount, as its $110 billion merger with Warner Bros is temporarily halted.
Shortly after reaching an agreement with Paramount to postpone the merger, several state attorneys general, who initially sued to prevent the merger, requested a California judge to schedule a trial. The trial was granted and scheduled for April 2027; the fate of the merger will be determined either once the court rules on the lawsuit or June 1, 2027, whichever happens first.
Since federal authorities greenlit this merger, many individuals are questioning why and how states can oppose it. Notably, antitrust laws exist at both state and federal levels, and Ray emphasizes to Vulture that states can use both bodies of law to seek legal action even if the Federal government does not. “States are allowed to be plaintiffs in federal cases, and states have their own antitrust laws they can enforce,” he explains.
While speaking with Vulture, Ray draws parallels to the Live Nation–Ticketmaster antitrust case, an instance in which the federal government initially settled with Live Nation. However, multiple state attorneys general opted not to join the settlement, which Ray highlights, noting that “The states continued with the trial and ended up actually winning the trial.”
