State Attorneys General Widen the Antitrust Battlefield

State attorneys general are moving to the center of antitrust enforcement, with bipartisan coalitions attacking merger settlements, information-sharing arrangements, labor-market restrictions, and industry coordination on environmental standards. For companies across industries, state antitrust risk can no longer be an afterthought in compliance and transaction planning.

Second Bite at the Apple: Fighting Federal Merger Enforcement

Paramount Skydance-Warner Bros. Discovery

On July 13, 2026, 12 state attorneys general sued to block Paramount’s $110 billion acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery, a month after the DOJ Antitrust Division cleared the deal and after dozens of other jurisdictions had done so. The coalition secured a temporary restraining order, and Paramount then stipulated not to close the transaction until five days after a trial on the merits or June 1, 2027, whichever is earlier. The Writers Guild of America filed a parallel antitrust suit against Paramount. However, on September 21, 2026, Paramount settled with the coalition and separately settled with the WGA. The court entered the coalition’s consent decree on September 30, and Paramount completed the acquisition of Warner Bros. on October 6, 2026.

Nexstar-Tegna

In March 2026, eight state attorneys general sued to block Nexstar’s $6.2 billion acquisition of Tegna Inc. The next day, the FCC and DOJ cleared the deal, and Nexstar closed it. On April 17, 2026, the Eastern District of California granted a preliminary injunction barring the companies from integrating their operations. The coalition has since grown to 13 states, including three Republican AGs. In August, the court found that Nexstar’s placement of its own executives on Tegna’s board was a “brazen” violation of the injunction. Nexstar’s Ninth Circuit appeal is set for oral argument on November 17, 2026, and trial is set for July 6, 2027.

HPE-Juniper Networks

The DOJ settled its challenge to Hewlett Packard Enterprise’s $14 billion acquisition of Juniper Networks in June 2025. In October 2025, 12 states and the District of Columbia moved to intervene in the Northern District of California’s review, calling the settlement “facially inadequate” and alleging improper lobbying influence at DOJ. The court granted intervention in November 2025 but, on August 12, 2026, approved the settlement over the states’ objections, noting that the states remain free to bring their own action.

Live Nation-Ticketmaster

The DOJ and dozens of states sued Live Nation and Ticketmaster for monopolization. After the DOJ settled mid-trial in March 2026 without requiring a Ticketmaster divestiture, 33 states and the District of Columbia rejected the deal and continued. On April 15, 2026, a jury found Live Nation and Ticketmaster liable under federal and state antitrust law. The states are seeking monetary relief and divestiture of Ticketmaster, and Live Nation has moved to overturn the verdict.

Practical implication: Federal clearance is no longer the final word. Companies pursuing concentrated, consumer-facing deals should expect state scrutiny even after federal review ends.

Cartel and Information-Sharing Enforcement

Egg Producers

On June 29, 2026, the DOJ and 17 state attorneys general sued Cal-Maine Foods, Hickman’s Egg Ranch, and Versova/Centrum, alleging they coordinated bids to manipulate the industry benchmark for egg prices. Proposed settlements require $3.3 million in payments to the states, donation of 53 million eggs to food banks, and new antitrust-compliance programs. The defendants denied wrongdoing, and the settlements remain subject to court approval under the Tunney Act.

Agri Stats

On May 7, 2026, six states led by Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, working with DOJ, settled a 2023 lawsuit alleging that Agri Stats’ selective sharing of competitively sensitive pricing and output data let meat processors coordinate prices.

Practical implication: States now treat competitor information exchange—even through a third-party aggregator—as core cartel conduct. Companies using benchmarking services or data pools, especially in agriculture and commodities, should reassess them.

Labor Markets

No-Poach Agreements

On April 30, 2025, California Attorney General Rob Bonta sued Packers Sanitation Services, Inc., alleging that no-poach provisions in 22 of its 24 California contracts restricted job mobility for 6,000 workers. The case settled on December 2, 2025 for $500,000, and the company agreed to stop using no-poach agreements.

Staffing Agencies

The Illinois attorney general has also settled no-poach and wage-fixing cases against staffing agencies, including a $1 million settlement with Midway Staffing Inc. in June 2025 that closed a 2020 case recovering $5.5 million in total. A related 2022 case, which survived a motion to dismiss in April 2025, ended in May 2026 when Vee Pak, the last remaining defendant, settled for $625,000, bringing total recoveries to about $2.5 million.

Practical implication: Companies should treat no-poach and non-solicitation provisions as enforcement priorities.

Environmental Coordination

Consumer Goods

In October 2025, a Florida-led coalition of Republican attorneys general sent warning letters to the U.S. Plastics Pact, Consumer Goods Forum, and Green Blue Institute, followed in February 2026 by letters to nearly 80 member corporations. The states allege coordinated recycling and packaging targets restrain output and limit consumer choice. No lawsuit has been filed, but Florida has since issued civil investigative demands to the groups and several member companies.

Transportation

In November 2024, Nebraska’s attorney general sued truck manufacturers over their “Clean Truck Partnership” to coordinate compliance with California’s electric truck mandate. In August 2025, the manufacturers stipulated that the partnership was void, and the case was dismissed.

Practical implication: Companies should assess whether participation in industry coordination of any kind—even sustainability initiatives—could be recast as anticompetitive.

What This Means for Companies

• Federal sign-off does not end antitrust risk. States have challenged, enjoined, or intervened in deals the DOJ or FCC had already cleared.
• Coalitions cross party lines. The Nexstar/Tegna and egg-producer matters drew both Democratic and Republican AGs, so this is not a one-party trend.
• Information-sharing arrangements remain a top target. Shared benchmarks and data aggregators continue to draw scrutiny in agriculture and beyond, independent of merger review.
• Antitrust theories are expanding. Information-sharing, no-poach terms, and coordinated sustainability commitments are now credible antitrust targets, not just mergers and pricing.
• Several matters remain unresolved. Nexstar/Tegna, Live Nation’s post-trial proceedings, and the egg-producer and Agri Stats settlements are still in progress, so companies should track developments rather than treat any outcome as final.

This information is provided by Vinson & Elkins LLP for educational and informational purposes only and is not intended, nor should it be construed, as legal advice.