The proposed $82.7 billion acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery has pushed Netflix into the political spotlight, as U.S. lawmakers intensify scrutiny over whether the deal could reshape — or restrict — competition in the streaming industry. On Tuesday, Netflix’s leadership will face pointed questions in the U.S. Senate, underscoring how the transaction has quickly evolved from a corporate power play into a high-stakes regulatory and political test.

A Senate Hearing With Broad Implications

Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos is set to testify before a Senate antitrust panel led by Senator Mike Lee, alongside Warner Bros.’ chief strategy officer Bruce Campbell. While Congress does not have the authority to block mergers directly, such hearings often serve as a powerful platform to shape public opinion and signal enforcement priorities to regulators.

The focus will be on how Netflix’s acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery could affect consumers, workers, and rivals at a time when the streaming market is already consolidating. Lawmakers from both parties have raised concerns that combining two of the world’s largest content platforms could narrow choices and tilt bargaining power in favor of a single dominant player.

Regulatory Review and Rival Pressure

The U.S. Department of Justice is already reviewing the transaction, adding to investor uncertainty around timing and approval risk. Complicating matters further is a competing, hostile bid from Paramount Skydance, which argues it would face fewer regulatory hurdles. Netflix, however, remains the front-runner, largely due to its balance sheet strength and global scale.

Both suitors are drawn to Warner Bros.’ prized assets, including its vast film and television library and iconic franchises spanning fantasy, superheroes, and prestige television. Control of such intellectual property is increasingly viewed as a strategic moat in the streaming wars, where subscriber growth has slowed and content differentiation has become critical.

Market Definition at the Core of the Debate

Netflix has defended the deal by pointing to viewing data showing that platforms like YouTube command more television screen time than any single subscription service. Antitrust experts, however, expect regulators to focus on a narrower market definition — paid, subscription-based streaming — where Netflix and Warner Bros. would wield considerable combined influence.

Senator Lee has also raised the possibility that Netflix could gain an unfair competitive edge during the review process itself. He has questioned whether Netflix personnel have accessed Warner Bros.’ sensitive internal data, warning that early exposure could enable replication of projects, strategic positioning, or algorithmic targeting before the deal is finalized.

Political Optics and Strategic Risk

Beyond legal thresholds, the optics matter. With heightened political sensitivity around big tech and media concentration, prolonged scrutiny could delay the transaction for more than a year, increasing execution risk and distracting management. For Netflix, the hearing is as much about reassuring policymakers as it is about convincing investors that the strategic upside outweighs regulatory drag.

Looking ahead, the Senate hearing is unlikely to be the final word, but it may set the tone for a drawn-out antitrust battle. Markets will be watching closely for signals from both lawmakers and regulators that clarify whether this deal represents a bridge too far in the evolving streaming landscape.