State Argues Constitutional Questions Are Moot After Merger Abandonment

Assistant Attorney General Paula Pera told the panel that the public interest in the constitutional questions dissipated when the parties abandoned the merger. "First, the public importance ceased when the merger was abandoned," she said, arguing the narrower injunction (if required) would leave the state with declaratory and injunctive relief and thus a prevailing judgment.

Appellants countered that some precedents hold that remaining monetary stakes can prevent mootness; the judges asked both sides to identify where additional damages or monetary hooks distinguished prior cases cited at argument. The panel probed the relationship between federal antitrust regulation and state enforcement and asked whether the dormant commerce clause is implicated when Congress has an active regime for merger review.