Anthem Inc. and the U.S. Justice Department on Thursday presented contrasting visions of the health care industry in the ramp up to trial in the government’s push to block the insurance company’s proposed $54 billion deal to acquire Cigna Corp.

Related: Anthem threatens Obamacare retreat if results don't improve

The opposing sides, locked in a bitter dispute in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, submitted their “pre-trial briefs” to the presiding judge, Amy Berman Jackson, who has set trial for Nov. 21. Antitrust enforcers in July sued to stop the merger, which Justice Department officials said would raise insurance premiums and lower the quality of health care.

That dire prediction, of course, is not shared by Anthem’s lawyers at White & Case and Arnold & Porter.

“The U.S. Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division and a handful of state AGs seek to enjoin a merger they acknowledge is likely to reduce healthcare costs for millions of working Americans,” Anthem’s attorneys said in their court papers on Thursday.

Related: Anthem's desperate bid to save Cigna acquisition

Anthem’s lawyers, including White & Case’s Christopher Curran, called the Justice Department’s antitrust suit “an extraordinary action in which federal and state competition authorities are, according to their own allegations, seeking to deprive American consumers of lower healthcare costs.”

Lawyers for Anthem said the government at trial cannot show the merger will cause a “substantial lessening” of competition in the health care insurance arena.

“Anthem will establish that its proposed merger with Cigna would be a decidedly procompetitive transaction, bringing lower healthcare costs—as well as greater innovation—to millions,” Anthem’s attorneys wrote.

The Justice Department has alleged Anthem’s acquisition of Cigna would hurt competition for millions of consumers who receive commercial insurance from large national employers, as well as from large-group employers in at least 35 metropolitan areas and from public exchanges created by the Affordable Care Act.

In the DOJ brief Thursday, the Justice Department said it needs only to show a substantial loss to competition in one of those markets.

“Plaintiffs will clear that standard by a wide margin,” government lawyers said in their court filing.

The Justice Department said at trial it will present “extensive evidence that the merger is likely to have serious anticompetitive effects in dozens of markets—increasing Anthem’s market power, raising prices of health-insurance plans, forcing down payments to healthcare providers, and reducing the availability and quality of healthcare services—harming consumers and healthcare providers alike.”

Jackson has suggested she will split the trial into two parts, considering the merger's effect on the national market before hearing arguments on its effect on local markets. In September, Jackson said she might give a preliminary decision after the first phase, but she would not hand down a final decision until January.