Paramount Wants the States and WGA Suing to Block Its Warner Bros. Merger to Post a $1.9 Billion Bond

The company argues every month of delay carries real financial cost. California’s attorney general calls it blackmail.

Paramount Skydance has asked a federal judge to force the 12 states and the Writers Guild of America suing to block its merger with Warner Bros. Discovery to post a bond of $1,884,726,092.73, or see the current hold on the deal dissolved entirely.

The company filed the motion Monday with Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín, who has set a trial start date of March 2, 2027.

The number isn’t arbitrary. Paramount agreed to pause its $111 billion takeover of Warner Bros. Discovery until the antitrust trial concludes, a delay that comes with a real cost built into the merger agreement itself: a ticking fee owed to Warner Bros. Discovery shareholders, roughly $7 million a day, that starts accruing October 1 and keeps running until the deal closes.

Run that fee out through a possible June 2027 closing date and add in financing costs, and Paramount says the total comes to close to $1.9 billion. The company wants the plaintiffs to guarantee that amount by September 30, arguing that’s exactly what federal antitrust law requires of parties who sue to halt a transaction.

The states, led by California Attorney General Rob Bonta, sued in July to block the deal, arguing it would illegally reduce competition in theatrical film and basic cable television.

The WGA filed its own suit on similar grounds, warning the merger would shrink the pool of buyers for writers’ work. Both lawsuits remain the only real obstacles left. Paramount says the deal has already cleared regulatory review in 68 jurisdictions.

Bonta’s office didn’t hold back in response, calling Paramount’s request a “do-over” on an agreement the company entered into with full knowledge of the risk. “Paramount went into this process with eyes wide open,” the AG’s office said. “They are lying in a bed of their own making, and once again, trying to blackmail us to get us to back down.”

That blackmail language traces back further than Monday’s filing. Paramount CEO David Ellison had reportedly pressed Bonta to settle ahead of the October 1 fee deadline, and floated the idea of moving Paramount’s operations out of California entirely if no deal materialized, a threat multiple outlets described as widely mocked rather than taken seriously.

Settlement talks aren’t off the table, according to Bonta, but only on his terms. He’s said repeatedly that he wants structural remedies, like divestitures, rather than behavioral promises.

Paramount has floated a few of the latter, including a pledge to release 30 films theatrically per year and reported consideration of an editorial oversight board for CNN to preserve its independence under the combined company. Neither has moved the needle so far.

Beyond the states and the WGA, the merger also faces a separate lawsuit from a Paramount shareholder; a consumer suit seeking to block the deal was filed and later dismissed.

As of Monday, neither California’s Department of Justice nor the WGA had issued a public response to the bond motion itself. A Paramount spokesperson said the company remains confident the plaintiffs’ case is “without merit” and that it intends to defend the deal in court, calling it “pro-competitive.”

The current hold on closing runs until five days after the trial concludes, or June 1, 2027, whichever comes first.