Bonta defends Paramount settlement: ‘resolves the antitrust concerns’

The settlement ends a fractious two-month legal battle.

LOS ANGELES — Rob Bonta on Monday defended his settlement of an antitrust case with Paramount Skydance that cleared the way for the company to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery and become one of the world’s largest media conglomerates.

The California attorney general, who had joined forces with other states in a lawsuit to block the transaction, argued the settlement would soften the impacts of media consolidation even as he maintained he did not believe the companies should merge.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

“Some of you who may be watching this may have wanted a different outcome. I understand that,” Bonta said at a press conference in Los Angeles. But he argued he’d reached a settlement capable of “providing more film production that protects Hollywood workers and their livelihoods, that places guardrails allowing for robust cable negotiations, that protects competition and creates more choice for consumers about what this merger could mean for the industry.”

It “resolves the antitrust concerns at the heart of our lawsuit against the company and Warner Brothers,” he said.

The settlement ends a fractious two-month legal battle that was seen as a major test of California’s ability to exert regulatory power over a high-profile business deal that Donald Trump signaled he wanted completed — and a defining moment for Bonta, whose national profile had risen during the dispute.

Paramount agreed in a consent decree to increase spending on domestic film production by at least $300 million annually, produce 30 movies in each of the first two years of the deal and establish an independent board of journalists to monitor the editorial independence of CNN and CBS News, both of which would be owned by the new media conglomerate.

The agreement came as a disappointment to opponents of the transaction, including the Block the Merger Coalition, which cast the settlement as a sweetheart deal for Paramount Chief Executive David Ellison and his father, Oracle Co-Founder Larry Ellison, who is financially backstopping the acquisition.

“This is a bad deal for the future of film, entertainment, independent journalism, and a strong democracy in this country,” the coalition said in a statement. “We are disappointed and angry that the interests of average Americans have been trampled to benefit oligarch billionaires.”

The Writers Guild of America in a statement predicted the merger would still be harmful to the industry but that the union “must contend with the reality of forging ahead alone, with no backing from government enforcers.”

David Ellison in a statement thanked California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who had reportedly expressed concerns about the states’ lawsuit, “for his support throughout this process.”

Click here to read the full article on Politico

 

California AG Rob Bonta might be thinking about a run for governor. He shouldn’t

Attorney General Rob Bonta, like many California Democrats of a certain level, looks at the field of candidates running to be governor and thinks: I could take that crew. 

One word of advice as he ponders a run: Don’t. 

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

Instead, do something that few other politicians consider when presented with an opportunity to run for higher office: Stick with your day job that you’re doing well. 

I’d still bet the car that he runs for governor. It’s what politicians do. They climb and they run. Rinse and repeat. It’s the same way everyone tries to ascend the ladder at work — except elected officials do it publicly and while being paid by us.

Bonta, the state’s attorney general since Gov. Gavin Newsom appointed him in 2021, is doing a solid job at fulfilling the promise he made to Californians two days after Donald Trump was reelected in November 2024: “You can be sure that as California Attorney General, if Trump attacks your rights: I’ll be there. If Trump comes after your freedoms: I’ll be there.” 

As the Chronicle recently detailed, Bonta has sued the Trump administration 52 times in the first year of Trump 2.0. The courts have ruled in California’s favor in about 80% of those cases, Bonta said, or the administration has backed down and agreed to settle. Bonta said the victories add up to $168 billion in savings for the state.

In suits that Bonta has led or joined, federal judges have blocked the Trump administration’s freeze on virtually all domestic federal funding and mass layoffs in agencies such as the U.S. Department of Education and the AmeriCorps volunteer program. Federal courts have stopped Trump’s deployment of California National Guard troops on the streets of Los Angeles, although they have allowed the president to take control of National Guards in California and other states. In a court filing this week, Trump agreed to return control of California’s National Guard to the state. Courts have also prohibited him from requiring states like California to join his immigration crackdown in order to keep billions of dollars in federal funding for highways and airports, aid to crime victims, and security against potential terrorist attacks.

Click here to read the full article in the SF Chronicle

Shelley: Racketeering or politics? For Attorney General Rob Bonta, it’s all fine.

Here’s a riddle for you: What’s the difference between racketeering and politics?

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

Take your time.

Federal law, 18 U.S. Code Section 1861, defines racketeering activity to include “any act or threat” involving a long list of state and federal crimes. These may include obstruction of justice, obstruction of criminal investigations, money laundering, mail fraud, wire fraud, straw purchasers, extortion and certain false statements. 

It’s stunningly similar to what’s needed for a long and successful career in California politics.

 There is absolutely nothing to suggest that California Attorney General Rob Bonta is guilty of any crime. The fact that he recently paid $468,228 from his re-election campaign account to a law firm with a practice area in “government investigations” is absolutely not indicative of any activity by the attorney general that is in any way illegal. Everything’s fine.

The website for the law firm of Wilson Sonsini states that its “experienced team” of attorneys “have assisted clients facing all types of inquiries,” including “responding to letters of inquiry or subpoenas” in both “informal” and “large-scale, formal investigations, including parallel criminal and civil proceedings involving potentially significant financial penalties or other severe consequences.”

These are not the lawyers you call for a car accident. Bonta was contacted by federal law enforcement authorities as part of an investigation into bribery. Former Oakland mayor Sheng Thao was indicted in January, as were her partner Andre Jones and two longtime Bonta donors, Oakland business owners Andy and David Duong. The FBI raided Thao’s home and some of the Duongs’ properties in June 2024.

Bonta told KCRA’s Ashley Zavala, who broke the story of the massive legal bills, that he was a “witness who provided information that may be helpful to their investigation of other people.” He said the federal government first reached out to him because they thought he was “a victim of potential extortion or blackmail.” 

Everything’s fine. The attorney general of California may have been blackmailed. Over what? We don’t know, and perhaps the $468,228 he spent on lawyers will keep it that way.

How does a legal bill get that high? Bonta said he had attorneys “working around the clock to be responsive” starting in the “late summer or early fall of 2024.” He said he provided documents to the government from “multiple devices, multiple computers and laptops; there’s a lot of places where information is stored, and every one of us has a very significant data footprint.”

Sounds like this fell under the category of “responding to letters of inquiry or subpoenas” on the law firm’s list of services. Bonta told Zavala he is “1,000% not a target” of the investigation. 

Everything’s fine.

The Fair Political Practices Commission, which regulates and enforces laws on campaign finance in California, confirmed to Zavala that it received a complaint over Bonta’s use of campaign funds to pay these legal bills and would decide within 14 days whether to open an investigation. Don’t hold your breath. Even if it’s an illegal use of campaign funds, what are they supposed to do, refer the case to the attorney general? 

So everything’s fine, but Bonta would like you to know that he has given away the $155,100 in campaign contributions from the Duongs and their associates “out of an abundance of caution.” 

Click here to read the full article in the OC Register

Prop 50 Hearing Set for Mid December Despite AG Bonta’s Efforts to ‘Run Out The Clock on Justice’

The hearing in front of a federal three-judge panel has now been set for December 15

California Governor Gavin Newsom unconstitutionally overturned the voter-approved California Redistricting Commission with Proposition 50, which was just passed by voters earlier this month. That is bad enough, but the new congressional district maps were drawn based on racial lines, a recent lawsuit, filed by The Dhillon Law Group, Assemblyman David Tangipa, 18 California voters, and the California Republican Party, alleges.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

Expediting the federal hearing has met expected resistance from California Attorney General Rob Bonta, who is defending Secretary of State Shirley Weber and Governor Gavin Newsom in the complaint. The hearing in front of a federal three-judge panel has now been set for December 15, despite Bonta’s efforts to delay the hearing until January 20, 2026.

As reported by KCRA:

Court documents show the attorney general’s office last week asked the court to push the hearing date to January 20 and for the hearing to last five days. The state’s attorneys said Republicans alone appeared to have six hours of planned witness testimony and another two hours of oral arguments.

Bonta’s office said the Dec. 3 hearing would “not provide enough time to build a sufficient record to enable the Court to render the necessary findings of fact and conclusions of law on Plaintiffs’ and Plaintiff-Intervenor’s claims.”

It’s not clear yet if the hearing on Dec. 15 in Los Angeles will last one day or stretch further into the week. Court filings from Friday show judges have asked each side to provide a list of witnesses by Wednesday, Nov. 26, and then file a joint list of witnesses and exhibits with the court by Monday, Dec. 1.

After the lawsuit challenging Prop 50 was filed, Attorney Mark Meuser, Constitutional and Election Law Attorney with Dhillon Law Group, told the Globe that the state of California and the DCCC are trying to change the rules already agreed upon in order to delay a hearing on this case until January 20, well after the December date those running for Congress will know or determine what district they are running in.

“Eight days after Plaintiffs filed their complaint in which they allege that Prop 50’s map is an unconstitutional racial gerrymander, the state of California, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), along with plaintiffs entered into a stipulation for a briefing schedule,” Meuser told the Globe. “Plaintiffs have asked the Court for an order by Dec. 5 so that those running for Congress know what district they are running in. December 19 is the first day candidates for Congress can gather signatures in lieu of a filing fee. In light of the joint stipulation, the Court has told the state of California and the DCCC to file their opposition to our motion for a preliminary injunction by tomorrow (Nov. 21) and the hearing on our motion for preliminary injunction (i.e. which set of maps will control the 2026 election – the 2021 commission map or Prop. 50’s map) has been scheduled for Dec. 3.”

Click here to read the full article in the California Globe

Pondering a run for governor, Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta faces questions about legal spending

  • California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta is reconsidering a gubernatorial run as Kamala Harris and Alex Padilla are not in the race, saying the contest’s contours have fundamentally changed.
  • The state’s top law enforcement official faces scrutiny over nearly $500,000 in campaign funds spent on private lawyers.
  • Bonta says the legal expenses were necessary to cooperate with federal investigators who approached him about potential blackmail or extortion threats.

As California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta ponders a run for governor, he faces scrutiny for his ties to people central to a federal corruption investigation in Oakland and payments to private attorneys.

Bonta has not been accused of impropriety, but the questions come at an inopportune time for the Democrat, who says he is reassessing a gubernatorial bid after repeatedly dismissing a run earlier this year.

Bonta said the decisions by former Vice President Kamala Harris and Sen. Alex Padilla not to seek the office altered the contours of the race.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

“I had two horses in the governor’s race already,” Bonta said in an interview with The Times on Friday. “They decided not to get involved in the end. … The race is fundamentally different today, right?”

Bonta said he has received significant encouragement to join the crowded gubernatorial field and that he expects to make a decision “definitely sooner rather than later.” Political advisors to the 54-year-old Alameda politician have been reaching out to powerful Democrats across the state to gauge his possible support.

Historically, serving as California attorney general has been a launching pad to higher office or a top post in Washington. Harris, elected to two terms as the state attorney general, was later elected to the U.S. Senate and then as vice president. Jerry Brown served in the post before voters elected him for a second go-around as governor in 2010. Earl Warren later became the chief justice of the Supreme Court.

Bonta, the first Filipino American to serve as the state’s top law enforcement official, was appointed in March 2021 by Gov. Gavin Newsom after Xavier Becerra resigned to become U.S. Health and Human Services secretary. Bonta easily won election as attorney general in 2022.

Bonta was a deputy city attorney in San Francisco and vice mayor for the city of Alameda before being elected to the state Assembly in 2012. During his tenure representing the Alameda area, Bonta developed a reputation as a progressive willing to push policies to strengthen tenants’ rights and to reform the criminal justice system.

In his role as the state’s top law enforcement official, Bonta has aggressively fought President Trump’s policies and actions, filing 46 lawsuits against the administration.

Bonta also faced controversy this past week in what his advisors say they suspect is an attempt to damage him as he considers a potential run.

Click here to read the full article in the LA Times

Attorney General Rob Bonta’s campaign spent nearly half a million dollars for legal help amid bribery probe

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California Attorney General Rob Bonta’s reelection campaign spent nearly half a million dollars on legal fees and services this year to a private law firm amid a federal bribery investigation.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

Two days before he announced he would not run for governor and seek reelection as attorney general in February, Bonta made five separate payments to the law firm Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati totaling $468,228. Campaign finance records show the payments were for “professional services (legal, accounting).” The money specifically came from his 2026 reelection campaign account, which had about $6.2 million in it as of October.

Dan Newman, Bonta’s senior adviser, confirmed to KCRA 3 that the payments are for legal help in the East Bay bribery investigation that involves Oakland’s ex-mayor Sheng Thao and the Duong family. Bonta was not charged with a crime when the investigation was made public in January.

After the investigation was made public and Bonta’s ties to the Duong family were reported, he returned the $155,000 in campaign contributions he had received from the family.

“There are of course ongoing legal proceedings in the East Bay in which several people were charged with serious crimes,” Newman said in a statement. “The AG wants to ensure that anyone who committed a crime is held accountable, so he engaged outside legal counsel to help his law enforcement partners pursue justice.”

Citing the ongoing investigation, Newman could not share any other information. It’s not clear how much of the money has been used for Bonta to have outside legal counsel for himself and how much is being used to help investigators. Bonta never publicly stated he would use his own campaign funds to help with the investigation.

A spokesperson for Wilson, Sonsini, Goodrich & Rosati did not respond to repeated requests for comment on Monday. The law firm specializes in technology and life sciences and is known for representing startups, venture capital firms and large companies. It also has a team of lawyers dedicated to litigation, including government investigations and white-collar crimes.

Click here to read the full article at KCRA

How much money has California spent on lawsuits against the Trump administration so far?

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — California is averaging about a lawsuit a week against the federal government ever since President Donald Trump took office six months ago, work that has cost state taxpayers about $5 million so far.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

Attorney General Rob Bonta on Monday announced the state’s 35th lawsuit against the Trump administration, which was filed in an attempt to protect the sensitive and personal information of low-income people who receive government benefits for groceries.

In a news conference alongside the Democratic attorneys general of New York and Michigan, Bonta said, “President Trump made promises to the American people, and now he’s breaking them.”

Earlier this year, the California Legislature and Gov. Gavin Newsom set aside $25 million for Bonta to take on the Trump administration in court. Bonta told reporters he has so far used $5 million of that and expects to use more funds from that account soon.

Bonta said he’ll request to draw down a figure in the “multiple millions,” but his office as of Monday night did not provide a specific number just yet.

Part of the legislation that set the money aside requires the attorney general to maintain a website to track the status of those lawsuits. The attorney general’s office has been using this website to do so. The office has split the court battles into categories from voting rights to LGBTQ issues, immigration, education and more.

Click here to read the full article at KCRA

California vs. Trump: What it’s like to be the attorneys on the front lines

  • Although critics have bemoaned the Democratic response to President Trump as inept, California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta’s office has been working around the clock to fight Trump’s policies in court, with some success.

Michael Newman, head of the civil rights enforcement section in California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta’s office, was exhausted.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

Newman and his legal team had just worked all weekend, straight through that Monday and overnight into Tuesday on a growing pile of legal challenges to the Trump administration, and were overdue for some sleep.

But on his drive home, he was alerted that the administration “cut half the Department of Education’s workforce,” Newman said. “And it’s like, ‘OK, well … That’s not happening.’”

The team went back to work, along with others in Bonta’s office, and by Thursday joined with other Democrat-led states to file a new lawsuit to block the firings.

“That’s kind of an idea of what life is like for the litigators,” Newman said. “Just when you think it’s safe to log off from your laptop, you get the text that [says], ‘Did you see this newest order that just came out?’”

For months now, President Trump’s pace of pronouncements, executive orders and dramatic policy shifts has been so swift, their reach so sweeping, that many Trump critics have felt overwhelmed and alarmed. They have also bemoaned the Democratic response as inept, haphazard and ineffective, particularly in Congress.

But since Trump’s January inauguration, attorneys in Bonta’s office — and in the offices of Democratic attorneys general nationwide — have been in an all-out sprint to keep up and push back. They’ve been carefully planning for even longer, including by reviewing litigation from Trump’s first term; listening to Trump’s promises on the campaign trail; assessing lawsuits against the Biden administration by conservative states; and culling through Project 2025, the controversial game plan for the president’s second term.

The result has been a rapid-fire slate of lawsuits challenging Trump’s policies, including his order purporting to end birthright citizenship for the American-born children of immigrants, his attempt to cut off trillions of dollars in federal funding already appropriated by Congress for programs in California and across the country, and his firing of federal probationary employees in veterans programs, national parks and other agencies.

They also have sued to block cuts to National Institutes of Health funding for universities and other research institutions, the termination of K-12 teacher training and preparation grants, billionaire Elon Musk’s informal but prominent role in federal government and access to sensitive data by his Department of Government Efficiency, which is not a real government agency.

In addition to their own lawsuits, Bonta and other Democratic attorneys general have supported challenges to Trump administration attacks on transgender service members, refugees, immigrants, a National Labor Relations Board official, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and law firms that have angered Trump with their legal work.

Click here to read the full article in the LA Times

CA Attorney General Sues Trump Administration Over Birthright Citizenship Executive Order

Bonta claims order violates 14th Amendment, Immigration and Nationality Act

California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit along with 17 other states’ Attorneys General on Monday against President Donald Trump over his executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship, claiming that it violates the 14th Amendment.

Birthright citizenship, where anyone born in the United States automatically becomes a citizen, has been defended for decades as being part of the 14th Amendment. The ACLU has said that the Citizenship Clause of the Amendment, which states that “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside,” protects birthright citizenship.

Click Here to Subscribe to the California Political Review

However, the practice has also been argued against by those favoring a tighter border and reducing illegal immigration. Many have contended that the practice has been heavily abused for decades, with many migrants getting around legal immigration pathways by having an “anchor baby” to stay in the U.S. legally. Others have noted that only 33 countries in the world, including the United states, have unrestricted birthright citizenship, with another 32 having restricted birthright citizenship of some kind. And in recent years, there has been a growing legal argument stating that birthright citizenship isn’t protected by the 14th Amendment.

With the worst border crisis in American history occurring under the Biden administration, Trump ran a presidential campaign focused heavily on border and illegal immigrant reform. Trump made many campaign promises, including sealing the border with Mexico to counter drug smuggling and crime, beginning a mass deportation program of illegal aliens, ending Biden’s “catch and release” policy, reimplementing his “remain in Mexico” policy, and ending birthright citizenship. Following his election in November, Trump then vowed to make many of his promises laws on day one through executive orders.

On Monday, President Trump was true to his word, signing seven executive orders on immigration and border policies. This included ending birthright citizenship, meaning that the children of migrants in the U.S. either illegally or with a temporary visa will not automatically be made American citizens. In his Executive Order signed on Monday, Trump argued that the 14th Amendment has never been interpreted to extend citizenship to everyone born in the country.

“But the Fourteenth Amendment has never been interpreted to extend citizenship universally to everyone born within the United States,” the order said. “The Fourteenth Amendment has always excluded from birthright citizenship persons who were born in the United States but not ‘subject to the jurisdiction thereof.’  Consistent with this understanding, the Congress has further specified through legislation that ‘a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof” is a national and citizen of the United States at birth.”

Trump’s birthright citizenship Executive Order

The Executive Order then clarified the new policy:

“It is the policy of the United States that no department or agency of the United States government shall issue documents recognizing United States citizenship, or accept documents issued by State, local, or other governments or authorities purporting to recognize United States citizenship, to persons:  (1) when that person’s mother was unlawfully present in the United States and the person’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth, or (2) when that person’s mother’s presence in the United States was lawful but temporary, and the person’s father was not a United States citizen or lawful permanent resident at the time of said person’s birth.”

The new Executive Order was almost immediately challenged later in the day by the ACLU, which sued the Trump administration in a New Hampshire federal court. It was then followed up on Tuesday by Bonta’s lawsuit, which also included the Attorneys General of 17 other states, the District of Columbia, and the city of San Francisco. In his argument against the Executive order, Bonta said that all children born on U.S. soil are automatically granted U.S. citizenship under the 14th Amendment. He further stated that Trump’s order not only violates the 14th Amendment, but also Section 1401 of the Immigration and Nationality Act. In addition, Bonta and the others asked the court to block the Executive Order from going into effect while it is being played out in court.

Click here to read the full article in the California Globe

AG Rob Bonta Doubles Down On Limiting State, Local Participation In Immigration Enforcement

‘Bonta is just grandstanding here’

In a statement on Wednesday, Attorney General Rob Bonta announced updates to policies and recommendations to help guide public institutions in complying with California law limiting state and local participation in immigration enforcement activities, adding more to his attempt to block new tougher immigration policies next year.

Click here to SUBSCRIBE to CA Political Review 

For the last month, Bonta, as well as other Democratic California lawmakers, have rallied against President-elect Donald Trump’s proposed migrant policy changes, such as a ramping up of deportation efforts against illegal immigrants and stricter border measures. Entire cities have also gotten into it, with the Los Angeles City Council voting to make the city a sanctuary city a few weeks ago. Governor Gavin Newsom also recently proposed $25 million going to a legal defense fund to challenge immigration enforcement authorities. For Bonta, it has also meant attempting legal challenges against Trump, as well as strengthening California sanctuary state laws, despite the numerous issues with them.

On Wednesday, Bonta went even further, announcing updated guidance on SB 54/Sanctuary state laws. This included reiterating that hospitals, libraries, shelters, schools, and courthouses were safe spaces for illegal migrants.

“No matter who is in the White House, in California, we will continue to lead with California values. California is the most diverse state in the nation, and immigrants are the backbone of our economy, history, and culture. We will not be caught flat-footed if the President-elect follows through on his threats of mass deportation – and we will not allow safe spaces like libraries, hospitals, and courthouses to be co-opted and commandeered for his inhumane immigration agenda,” said Bonta. “Many public institutions already have policies in place for how to respond to immigration enforcement authorities – and we advise those who do not to make a plan today. My office will continue to use the full force of the law and every tool at our disposal to protect the rights of California’s immigrants – and we need staff at these critical locations to do the same. We cannot let the Trump deportation machine create a culture of fear and mistrust that prevents immigrants from accessing vital public services.”

He also reiterated that state courthouses, public healthcare facilities, and public schools are required to limit support of immigration enforcement activity. All other facilities, such as libraries, are encouraged to do so.

Click here to read the full article in the California Globe