CA A-G Says Paramount Threats Won't Work

California Attorney General Rob Bonta on Tuesday accused Paramount of attempting to “blackmail the state” with a reported threat to relocate operations out of California, declaring that the tactic “won’t work” as the company continues to lose ground in court. Bonta, who is leading a 12-state coalition’s antitrust lawsuit seeking to block Paramount’s roughly $110 billion acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery, responded directly to reports that Paramount CEO David Ellison told senior executives last week the company would begin exiting California as early as Oct. 1 unless Bonta agrees to settlement talks. 

“In a span of weeks, Paramount agreed to halt the merger until a court decision or until June 2027, asked for a November trial, and is now back with another attempt to blackmail the state into letting an illegal deal through,” Bonta wrote in a post on X. 

“Paramount has lost the plot as it continues to lose in court. It didn’t work the first time — on the eve of our July lawsuit — and it won’t work this time.” 

According to reports confirmed by multiple outlets, Ellison informed Paramount’s 12-member senior executive team during an Aug. 5 meeting on the studio lot that the board has approved a possible relocation. 

David Ellison

The move would start with headquarters staff and include a five-year plan to shift most film and television studio jobs out of the state, potentially to Tennessee, Georgia, Texas or another location. Ellison said the company would proceed with the exit—whether Paramount alone or a combined Paramount-Warner Bros. entity—regardless of the trial’s outcome if settlement negotiations do not begin. Paramount declined to comment. 

Oct. 1 marks the date the company begins accruing a “ticking fee” of about $7 million per day payable to Warner Bros. Discovery shareholders if the deal has not closed. 

The states’ antitrust case is scheduled for trial in March 2027 in federal court in the Northern District of California. The lawsuit, filed in July by California and 11 other states with Democratic attorneys general, alleges the merger would substantially lessen competition in wide-release movie distribution, blockbuster film distribution and cable channel licensing. 

The deal has already received clearance from the U.S. Department of Justice and international regulators, but the states argue it would lead to higher costs, fewer choices for consumers and reduced movie production. 

Bonta has previously described similar relocation threats as last-ditch efforts to pressure regulators into allowing what he calls an illegal deal. He has insisted any settlement would require structural remedies such as divestitures rather than behavioral conditions. Paramount has countered that the challenge is politically motivated and flawed on both facts and law.