backOn December 16, 2025, DIRECTV won its appeal to reinstate a federal lawsuit accusing Nexstar Media Group, Mission Broadcasting, and White Knight Broadcasting of conspiring to manipulate, raise, and fix prices of retransmission consent fees. The Second Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed that DIRECTV has standing to sue under antitrust laws and may prosecute its claims against Nexstar and its sidecars. This case will now resume in U. S. District Court in Manhattan.
“We are pleased that the 2nd Circuit has held that DIRECTV has standing in this case, and we plan to proceed with our claim that Nexstar, White Knight, and Mission have abused their “sidecar” relationship in violation of FCC regulations and longstanding competition laws. Nexstar’s sidecars have made a mockery of existing broadcast ownership rules, resulting in ever-increasing retransmission consent fees at consumers’ expense,” said Michael Hartman, Chief Legal Officer at DIRECTV.
Additional Background
In October 2022, station owners Mission and White Knight blocked DIRECTV’s ability to renew retransmission consent agreements, resulting in blackouts of Big-4 stations (ABC, CBS, NBC or FOX) in 25 DMAs. In negotiations, both owners were represented by a common agent, and both are sidecars of Nexstar, being formed by Nexstar to own stations that Nexstar was required to divest under the FCC’s rules barring common ownership of more than one Big 4 station in any DMA. The blackouts continue to this day.
The Lawsuit
On March 14, 2023, DIRECTV filed suit alleging Nexstar, Mission, and White Knight violated federal antitrust law by conspiring to fix the prices of retransmission consent fees in markets where both Nexstar and either Mission or White Knight own a Big-4 station. DIRECTV alleged that Mission and White Knight shared a common negotiator who was, in fact, an agent of Nexstar, who improperly shared confidential rates and other financial information with Nexstar, and that the three defendants coordinated their respective blackout dates and media responses.
However, the federal district court dismissed this case on the ground that DIRECTV lacks standing to assert antitrust claims against the defendants under the Sherman Act. The judge decided DIRECTV is not a “purchaser” or an efficient enforcer of the antitrust law because it declined to enter new carriage agreements with Mission and White Knight, so it has not paid the prices that resulted from the alleged price-fixing conspiracy. DIRECTV appealed, culminating in oral argument on December 9, 2024. The DOJ supported DIRECTV with an amicus brief and participation in argument before the appellate panel.
The Win on Appeal
The Second Circuit Court of Appeal reversed the district court in a 2-1 decision on Dec. 16, 2025, finding DIRECTV has standing to sue under antitrust laws and may prosecute its claims against Nexstar and its sidecars. The Court of Appeal rejected the defendants’ arguments that the damage DIRECTV has suffered from subscriber loss is too indirect or speculative, finding “the parties had a longstanding history of reaching agreements every three years” and because of this baseline DIRECTV “can identify concrete losses of subscribers and profits during the blackout periods that occurred when those RCAs terminated.” The court stressed that horizontal price-fixing “directly interfer[es] with the free play of market forces” and its victims are not limited to those who pay inflated prices. The court summarized: “Lost profits resulting from a reduction in output represent a cognizable antitrust injury, and DIRECTV plausibly alleges that its lost profits flowed directly from the output-reducing effects of the alleged price-fixing conspiracy.”
This case will resume in U. S. District Court in Manhattan.
The King & Spalding team includes Olivier N. Antoine and Paul Alessio Mezzina.