NEW YORK >> In a case that became a closely watched test of whether a corporation would back its journalists and stand up to President Donald Trump, Paramount Global decided to pay Trump $16 million to settle a lawsuit regarding editing at CBS’ storied “60 Minutes” news program.

Aftereffects of the deal are likely to linger. Journalists were infuriated Wednesday and a senator wants to investigate whether bribery laws were broken. The company was hoping to put the issue to rest as it seeks administration approval of a merger.

Paramount, which owns CBS, says the money will go to Trump’s future presidential library and to pay his legal fees, and it is not apologizing or expressing regret about the story. The company announced the deal overnight, before a Wednesday morning shareholders meeting.

Trump’s lawyers claimed he suffered “mental anguish” following the “60 Minutes” interview in October with his Democratic opponent, then-Vice President Kamala Harris, and sued for $20 billion.

At issue was the broadcast’s editing. Harris was shown giving two answers to a question about Israel by correspondent Bill Whitaker in clips aired on “60 Minutes” and “Face the Nation.” Both responses came as part of a long-winded answer that Harris gave to Whitaker.

Editing for brevity’s sake is commonplace in television. What was jarring was hearing different words from Harris directly after Whitaker spoke. Trump said CBS was trying to make his opponent look better; CBS said that claim had no merit in trying to get the case thrown out. Many legal experts dismissed the president’s claim.

But the Trump-appointed head of the Federal Communications Commission launched an investigation — a complication for Paramount as it seeks administration approval of its proposed merger with Skydance Media.

In Wednesday’s shareholders meeting, Paramount co-CEO George Cheeks said companies often settle litigation to avoid high legal costs and the unpredictability of a trial. Settlement allows a company to focus on its objectives “rather than being mired in uncertainty and distraction,” Cheeks said.

But it was received by Trump’s legal team with excitement. With the settlement, a spokesman said, Trump “delivers another win for the American people.”

“This settlement is a cowardly capitulation by the corporate leaders of Paramount, and a fundamental betrayal of ‘60 Minutes’ and CBS News,” said Rome Hartman, who helped produce the Harris interview for the show. “The story that was the subject of this lawsuit was edited by the book and in accordance with CBS News standards.”

CBS journalists stood united against the deal, seemingly in the works for months. CBS News President and CEO Wendy McMahon and “60 Minutes” executive producer Bill Owens, who both opposed a settlement, resigned this spring. In a letter to Paramount’s leadership in early May, the “60 Minutes” correspondents said they were troubled by reports that Paramount might settle the case “in a way that acknowledges some sort of wrongdoing on our part.”

The correspondents, in the letter obtained by The Associated Press, said that “if our parent company caves in to his pressure and lies, it will leave a shameful stain and undermine the First Amendment.” It was signed by Whitaker, Lesley Stahl, Scott Pelley, Anderson Cooper, Sharyn Alfonsi, Jon Wertheim and Cecilia Vega.

“Paramount’s decision to capitulate to Trump threatens journalists’ ability to do their job reporting on powerful public figures,” the Writers Guild of America East, which represents “60 Minutes” journalists, said in a statement.

Since the transcript and video of the Harris interview showed no evidence of wrongdoing, Paramount would have prevailed on the facts and law if it had pursued the case, said Anna M. Gomez, an FCC commissioner and Democrat. “But instead of standing on principle, Paramount opted for a payout,” Gomez said.

The deal “could be bribery in plain sight,” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass. She called for an investigation and new rules to restrict donations to presidential libraries.

As part of the deal, Paramount said that “60 Minutes” will in the future promptly release full transcripts of interviews with presidential candidates. That’s a significant change in the broadcast’s practices. It has traditionally kept its editing decisions to itself and didn’t release a transcript of the Harris interview until well after the election.

Indeed, the settlement is a blow to a program widely considered the best in broadcast journalism for decades. Following Owens’ departure, “60 Minutes” is leaderless and may not have a clearer view of its future until after the merger goes through.