Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird shared plans Tuesday to take California’s Rob Bonta to the Supreme Court over the state’s Paramount lawsuit. Bird published an op-ed in Daily Wire, sharing why she plans to bring California directly to the Supreme Court over filing a brief in the state.
In the article, Bird argued that Paramount’s acquisition of Warner Bros. would help the economy rather than hurt it, stating that “twelve states have overridden that judgment for the entire country, and Iowans never got a vote.”
“California is once again trying to be the country’s regulator. And once again California is defying common sense to raise costs around the country. That makes this a dispute between states, and the Constitution says those can only be heard in the U.S. Supreme Court,” Bird wrote. “Iowa cannot sue California in a district court, because Congress said so. Intervening in California’s chosen forum raises the same problem — at least until the Supreme Court tells us whether it agrees with Congress that it is the only court that can hear this case. Without that ruling, we would be walking into a case filed by California before a judge with no authority to decide a controversy between states.”
Assuming that Iowa could get oral arguments scheduled between Oct. 2026 and April 2027, a decision wouldn’t be made until late June or early July. It’s worth noting that June 4, 2027 marks the contractual expiration date when Warner Bros. can walk away from the $110 billion merger.
Donald Trump campaigned on the behalf of the Iowa state AG, who opened the op-ed by arguing that, despite there currently being more streaming services than ever, “almost any Iowa family” has noticed that “there are fewer quality shows, and that what they are watching just gets more expensive.”
“That’s what happens when one company gets too far out in front, and the companies chasing it are too small to catch up,” Bird wrote. “In other words, not enough real competition means everyday Iowans — and everyday Americans — are paying more.”
This, Bird argued, would change if David Ellison’s Paramount were able to absorb Warner Bros. under a merger. Bird, citing PBS, stated that a combined Paramount+ and HBO Max would still not equal the size of Netflix as the dominant streamer, nor would it be larger than Disney or Amazon’s services.
Bird evoked similar perceived benefits to the Paramount-Warner merger, citing Ellison’s promise to release 30 films a year with 90-day theatrical windows under the new company. Bonta reiterated to TheWrap on Monday that the state AGs are “not interested” in such behavioral remedies. Bonta did not immediately respond to TheWrap’s request for comment on Bird’s op-ed.
“Now think about what California’s delay is doing. Beginning in October, Paramount is contractually obligated to pay Warner Bros. roughly $7 million a day for as long as this transaction sits in limbo, and the trial that 12 state attorneys general have engineered will not even start until March 2027,” Bird wrote. “That money could have lowered streaming costs but instead is being burned on a lawsuit that federal antitrust enforcers and 68 regulators around the world already concluded was unnecessary.”
