Opponents of the Paramount–Warner Bros. Discovery merger are celebrating now that twin lawsuits in California have delayed the deal for many months.

After negotiations with the plaintiff lawyers, Paramount said Friday afternoon that it had agreed not to complete the mega-merger until an antitrust trial takes place, or until June 1, 2027, whichever comes first.

Paramount said it welcomed the “direct path to a trial based on the evidence.” But analysts called it a major setback for Paramount that adds to the cloud of doubt hovering over the controversial deal.

Mike Proulx, a research analyst at Forrester, said it well: “While things escalated quickly, it’s not surprising given all the drama surrounding this deal from the start,” he said. “The deal may still close or it may not. What we know is that the path to either outcome just got longer, messier, and likely more expensive.”

Longer, messier and more expensive are words that CEOs dread hearing. But that’s the reality for Paramount CEO David Ellison and his father Larry now.

Later in the evening, at the correspondents’ dinner, the president praised both men, identifying them as his friends in a media environment he views as hostile.

Trump made no mention of the deal delay. But his on-stage shoutouts to the Ellisons highlighted the political dimensions of the deal.

Paramount executives dispute the strength of the Democratic state attorneys generals’ lawsuit, arguing that it is politically fueled — which is the same argument that many of the deal’s critics make.

Now, due to the court-enforced delay, those arguments will continue for months.

One caveat: Friday’s announcement does not preclude all the parties involved from striking a settlement deal that would clear the path for the merger. But there are no indications that the states (or the Writers Guild of America) are heading in that direction right now.

“The states will likely be in no mood to settle, at least not early on, and at least not without major concessions,” M&A professor Paul Nary wrote on X.

Friday’s announcement does not foreclose a revision to the Paramount-Warner merger agreement, either. There is already some speculation about a restructuring of the deal. The current deal expires on March 4, and is subject to an automatic extension through June 4, 2027.

So, there are many unknowns. But here’s what to expect next…

Friday’s agreement means there will no longer be an August 3 hearing on the states’ request for a preliminary injunction, and it withdraws the Writers Guild’s similar motion.

Why? Because lawyers for Paramount reached the conclusion that the plaintiffs would likely prevail at the preliminary injunction stage, an executive involved in the matter told CNN. If that happened, the judge would implement a months-long delay anyway, and the court’s findings would weigh heavily at trial.

Thus, the source said, Paramount believes it’s better for the company to skip the injunction stage and seek a speedy trial. (At one point yesterday, I wrote “jury trial,” but this will actually be a bench trial before Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín. My apologies for the misstep.)

The lawyers now have to work out timing for a trial. Schedule proposals are due next Friday.

Paramount chief legal officer Makan Delrahim told Deadline’s Ted Johnson that the company will seek a November trial date. California AG Rob Bonta told CNN’s Jake Tapper that “we are likely to make a request to have trial in 2027, which is very appropriate based on the expert discovery that needs to happen… before a trial can and should go forward.”

Either way, as a practical matter, the delay means that Paramount will not take control of CNN before the US midterm elections.

And it means that the “ticking fee” — about $7 million per day — will take effect, starting in October, making the Warner deal even more expensive. If the merger is eventually allowed to happen, the layoffs and other cost-cutting measures will be even more extensive as a result.

“Paramount also faces a $7-billion breakup penalty if the blockbuster deal ultimately falls apart,” the LAT’s Meg James noted.

The true cost would be incalculable because, as the NY Post’s Charlie Gasparino wrote after speaking with Paramount sources, walking away from the deal would leave the Ellisons and “their partners at RedBird Capital with a smallish media company, devoid of the scale that Warner brings.”

This deal has always felt existential for Paramount. Gasparino quoted a source saying, “There’s no f–king way we give up. The Ellisons don’t quit.”

Tapper asked Bonta about the impending discovery process. “We want to talk to employees. We want to talk to others in the entertainment industry,” he said. “We want to depose their expert who seems to have a certain theory of the case.”

Bonta said the process “will make our case even stronger as we go to trial.”

Paramount has the opposite view, of course, and said a full-fledged trial “is the fastest and clearest way to prove that this transaction is good for competition, good for consumers, and good for creators, a conclusion dozens of competition authorities around the world have already reached.” Here’s my news recap.

The White House Correspondents’ Association was seeking to lower the proverbial temprature by successfully inviting Trump to dinner, ending his years-long boycott.

I’m not sure the temperature changed much at all. Some of Trump’s remarks were “vicious,” as press secretary Karoline Leavitt promised. But most of the lines were tired repeats. The more resentful and recycled Trump got, the more attendees seemed to tune it out. The consensus, both inside and outside the room, was that he bombed. The CNN panelists were unsparing right afterward.

Think about it: Members of the media mocking the leader’s dismal performance? In some other countries, that’s a criminal offense. But in the US, it’s the norm. So maybe Trump’s speech unwittingly underscored the theme of the dinner: America’s robust First Amendment.

The headline on my analysis piece for CNN.com is, “Trump bombed at the press dinner — and proved its point.”

Trump complained about liberal late-night comics at one point, but hey, comedic performances are hard to pull off!

And I want to note that Trump did strike some notes of unity, praising the Secret Service and denouncing political violence. “In this country, we believe in freedom of speech,” he said. “We settle our differences not with bullets, but with open and vigorous debate. And no deranged loser with a gun will ever change that.”

Amen. So the administration should put an end to its many, many anti-speech actions. “By issuing subpoenas to Times reporters and their families, this administration has once again shown it never really cared about the First Amendment,” Eli Lake of The Free Press wrote in this new column.

Trump’s speech underscored how much he cares about, and how much he covets, the media’s power. I could hear it as he rambled about TikTok. He wants that power, and he often resorts to insulting the journalists and news outlets he can’t control.

Last night he singled out several CNN journalists by name. CNN PR had a response ready to go, which says a lot about this media moment.

“We stand by our journalists and the integrity and fairmindedness with which the CNN team reports the news,” CNN CEO Mark Thompson’s statement said. “Honest, accurate journalism may sometimes irritate politicians, but our right to report and present that reporting to the public without government interference is fully protected by the US Constitution. CNN will continue to exercise this right.”

Up top I mentioned Trump’s praise for the Ellisons. “CBS News’s David Ellison” is “going to make, I think, fantastic changes and keep some of the great stuff going,” he said.

Trump’s later comment about Larry Ellison (not by name) was even more interesting. He talked about brokering the deal for Ellison and other investors to control TikTok in the US.

“He’s a friend of mine,” Trump said of Larry Ellison, “and he’s not contributing to problems like other people contribute to problems. So we get along.” I’d love to know what “problems” Trump was referencing.

The president also made a convoluted joke about the overhaul of CBS News: “Under my administration, a once-feared and powerful regime that relentlessly attacked America has finally been toppled. Their former leaders have been removed, and they’re now being run by a gay dictator facing internal divisions. But I, for one, wish Bari Weiss all the best at CBS News. She’s a wonderful woman.”

The president’s commentary about CBS doesn’t make anyone’s job there any easier.

As former WHCA president Eugene Daniels said on MS NOW last night, the president is “putting a line in the sand for all the leadership of every news organization around the country… He is making it clear what he expects from them. He is making it clear that he wants them to do what he wants to do. He wants them to feel like they are on his team.”

Before it was dinnertime, Trump was asked by the press pool about his administration dropping its subpoenas against the NYT.