Bonta Denies Floating CNN Spinoff to Drop Paramount-Warner Suit, FCC's Carr Says Receipts Say Otherwise

Since the 12-state lawsuit against the Paramount Skydance-Warner Bros. Discovery merger was filed Monday, the case has turned into a public fight between FCC Chairman Brendan Carr and California Attorney General Rob Bonta over what Bonta actually said behind closed doors.

Speaking at a Hill event Wednesday, Carr said he doubts the states' antitrust case will survive in court. His reasoning: reports had circulated weeks earlier suggesting California might drop its opposition to the $110 billion deal if Paramount agreed to spin off CNN as a standalone company, according to The Hill's Julia Manchester and TheWrap.

"I don't understand what antitrust theory you have that says there's a problem with this acquisition that is made or broken based on one cable channel being included," Carr said. "I think that's a bit of a tell that this really isn't a legitimate antitrust case, but ultimately, that'll be up for the courts to decide."

Bonta pushed back hard. "Unsure where this reporting originated from, but I've literally never said this," he wrote on X Wednesday, adding that "spinning off one channel from a media conglomerate is not a sufficient remedy to protect consumers and preserve competition in the film and television industry."

Carr didn't back down. He responded to Bonta with a screenshot from a Puck News report that claimed the California attorney general had floated a CNN sale as a possible off-ramp for the merger, according to TheWrap.

What Bonta Actually Said About Remedies

Bonta did discuss potential settlement terms in a separate appearance on KQED's Forum program Tuesday, describing what he called "structural remedies" as one option under consideration.

"What's a structural remedy? It means keeping corporate entities separate," Bonta said, according to TheWrap. "Having a suite of cable channels that remain separate from this merger, from this merged company. Having a streaming service that's separate. Having a news channel or a TV studio that's separate. Having a film studio that's separate."

That's a broader ask than just carving out CNN. Bonta said behavioral remedies, meaning conduct restrictions rather than actual divestitures, have "traditionally not proven to be effective."

Whether Bonta's comments about a possible CNN-specific carve-out ever happened in the way Puck News described is now a genuine, unresolved question. Carr is treating the earlier reporting as fact. Bonta says it doesn't reflect anything he told anyone.

The Underlying Antitrust Case

The lawsuit itself, filed Monday in California federal court by Bonta and attorneys general from Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, and Washington, argues the merger would hand one company outsized leverage over movie theaters, cable distributors, and streaming platforms.

The filing states the deal "combines two of the nation's five major film distributors, leaving only four to control over 85 percent of all wide-release theatrical films in the United States," and warns of harm to "movie theatres, basic cable distributors, and, ultimately, audiences nationwide."

A Paramount Skydance spokesperson called the lawsuit "a fundamentally flawed application of the antitrust laws" that is "wrong on both the facts and the law," noting that roughly two dozen countries and regulatory agencies have already concluded the merger poses no competitive threat, according to a company press release cited by Reason. Separately, a Paramount spokesperson said the company plans to "vigorously defend the transaction," arguing the challenge is "inconsistent with sound competition policy and the competitive realities of the media marketplace," according to TheWrap.

The states also followed the initial suit with a request for a temporary restraining order and an injunction, with Bonta saying on CNN that the request was meant to "make sure that the proposed merger is halted during the pendency of the litigation," according to TheWrap. The Writers Guild of America filed its own related suit, citing similar antitrust and competition concerns.

The U.S. Department of Justice's Antitrust Division cleared the deal last month, finding it "is not likely to result in harm to competition or American consumers." The FCC has not yet acted on the matter, and the agency's review matters separately because Paramount holds broadcast licenses for roughly two dozen CBS-owned local stations and is financing part of the purchase with foreign capital, which triggers federal foreign-ownership limits, according to The Desk.

Carr was also asked Wednesday about claims that Paramount CEO David Ellison has taken content cues from the Trump administration. "I have no idea what the basis for that is," Carr said. "It sounds like it has no basis at all."

What Comes Next

The litigation remains in its early stages, with the states seeking to block the deal from closing until a full review of its competitive impact can occur. Carr's public skepticism doesn't bind the court, but it signals the FCC chairman, who still must weigh in on the license-transfer side of the deal, doesn't see a strong antitrust case here.

The unresolved question is simple: did California ever actually offer to drop the suit over a CNN spinoff, or is that characterization wrong. Puck News's original reporting is the thread Carr is pulling on, and Bonta says it doesn't hold. Neither side has produced anything beyond dueling public statements to settle it, and the court filing itself doesn't mention a CNN-specific carve-out as a settlement term.