Letitia James, the New York Attorney General, announced that he wouldn’t appeal the federal court’s decision on Sprint & T-Mobile. Both these telecommunication providers are slated to begin to the long-awaited merger, which has experienced legal hurdles for a prolonged period. These hurdles followed after New York, and twelve other states sued both telecommunication providers, claiming that the $26 billion mergers would create a monopoly for small cell-phone companies. These states believed it’d harm consumers and affect the wireless industry, which began extensive legal battles throughout the Manhattan Federal Court. After two weeks of testimonies from numerous witness, the United States District Court Judge named Victor Marrero, rejected these lawsuit claims. This allowed for the merger to move forward with its completion.

The associated costs with battling thirteen states was a substantial hurdle for T-Mobile and Sprint Telecommunications to overcome. Both have competed for the 3rd and 4th position for market shares, with Sprint often losing to T-Mobile. These mergers were completed in hopes that Sprint Telecommunications wouldn’t be forced out of existence, which was following after depleting customers. T-Mobile will now obtain the full selection of customers maintained by Sprint, offering them similar packages under a more reliable network. The merger ultimately benefits millions of consumers in America, who hold Sprint contracts. New York District Judges demanded that both companies engage with mutually beneficial agreements for consumers, forcing them to provide the best service and pricing available.

The Fight Ensues

One of the most prominent states that were fighting this decision was California, which holds substantial ties with the Apple Corporation. Considering that Apple and AT&T work together on multiple infrastructure projects, some business analysts believed that these lawsuits were secretly forced onto state governors by executives at Apple. It’s why the Californian Attorney General pressed re-trails and demanded that the Senate oversee this lawsuit. The US District Attorney Judges determined that the claims were slanderous and couldn’t be re-approached in the courts.

It’d make sense that both Verizon and AT&T would be concerned regarding this merger. It’d mean more prominent competition, with T-Mobile acquiring an infrastructure that’s similar in size to these other telecommunication providers. It’ll force both AT&T and Version to create better contracts for consumers. It should be noted that this merger for Spring and T-Mobile to provide Dish Telecommunications with 10% of their overall infrastructure. This was required to ensure that a monopoly wasn’t forced into the phone service industry. Dish’s popularity in the United States is minimal, with this agreement barely affecting the mergers profits.