spot_img
Tuesday, September 22, 2026

Paramount settles antitrust suit that has caused much concern from state business, labor leaders

When N.J. joined case against studio, state economic and union leaders feared the participation could squash deal to bring Paramount to proposed 1888 Studios in Bayonne

Paramount reached an agreement on Monday to resolve the antitrust lawsuit that had delayed its $111 billion acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery — a suit that had caused great consternation among N.J. elected officials, business leaders and unions when N.J. signed on.

Those New Jersey leaders, concerned about whether the state’s participation would cancel Paramount’s commitment to be the lead partner in the massive 1888 Studios that are planned for Bayonne, had been exerting public pressure against the state and Attorney General Jennifer Davenport to drop the suit.

Public urgings from the Hispanic and African American Chambers were followed by an appeal from State Chamber head Tom Bracken and labor leader Bill Mullen, the head of the Building Trades.

A group of states, led by California, sued Paramount in July, arguing that an acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery would concentrate too much power over cable TV and blockbuster films under one company. New Jersey joined the suit later that month.

In settling the suit, Paramount agreed to:

  • Establish a board to ensure the editorial independence of CNN and CBS News;
  • Distribute 30 movies in theaters every year.
  • Spend an additional $1.5 billion on film production over the next five years – and guaranteed to increase the share of those movies made in the U.S.

The third provision is the most important to the state as the proposed 1888 Studios could be a location for many of them.

The proposed 58-acre, 1.6-million-square-foot campus broke ground last December with an aim to restore New Jersey’s place at the center of film and television production.

Mullen noted the estimated 2,600 union jobs the campus is expected to create in a letter to Davenport last week.

“This represents a significant amount of work for the men and women of New Jersey’s building trades that could be jeopardized by this litigation,” he wrote. “It would be deeply troubling for one arm of State government to place at risk the jobs and economic activity that other state entities have worked — and committed substantial public resources — to bring to New Jersey.”

+ posts

Get the Latest News

Sign up to get all the latest news, offers and special announcements.

Get our Print Edition

All the latest updates, delivered.

Latest Posts

Get the Latest News

Sign up to get all the latest news, offers and special announcements.

Get our Print Edition

All the latest updates, delivered.