What happened

A federal judge in California has extended a temporary restraining order that keeps Nexstar Media Group and Tegna Inc. operating as separate companies, despite the $6.2 billion deal having officially closed in March.

Judge Troy Nunley of the US District Court for the Eastern District of California wrote that the merger is “presumed likely to violate antitrust laws.” Legal observers say the language of his order signals a longer-term preliminary injunction is coming.

Why it matters: If the injunction holds, it would be a rare case of a completed merger being unwound on antitrust grounds — and a rebuke to the Trump administration regulators who approved the deal with minimal concessions.

The deal

Nexstar, already the largest TV station group in the United States, announced plans to acquire rival Tegna in August 2025. The FCC and Justice Department approved the deal in March 2026, and it closed on 19 March.

The combined company would own 259 full-power television stations affiliated with ABC, CBS, Fox, and NBC, reaching approximately 80% of US TV households.

The legal challenge

A coalition of eight state attorneys general, led by Democrats, and satellite TV provider DirecTV have filed parallel lawsuits arguing the merger violates antitrust law. Their central claim is that the combined Nexstar-Tegna would have the power to demand higher retransmission fees from cable and satellite distributors.

Judge Nunley noted that Nexstar and Tegna “do not contest this merger will increase Nexstar’s bargaining leverage to extract higher fees.” If distributors refuse to pay, they risk subscribers losing access to major programming including NFL games.

What happens next

Nunley has scheduled further hearings to determine whether a full preliminary injunction is warranted. Multiple industry attorneys said the language in his extension order appears to telegraph that outcome.

Nexstar has argued that aspects of the merger “cannot be reversed” and that a prolonged separation would damage both companies. The case is being closely watched as a test of whether courts will intervene after regulators have already approved a deal.