Also, when it comes down to it, boundaries are just about the most “official” thing we can be mapping. If the California Supreme Court, hearing an appeal from the Superior Court of San Francisco County, says San Francisco County is not really a thing, that seems pretty definitive, no? If this ever was a disputed boundary, Kahn v. Sutro (1886) and subsequent cases should’ve settled that dispute officially. Our best reason to second-guess such findings would be evidence on the ground that a boundary still exists de facto. All we have instead is that the boundary still exists de facto on paper.
Meanwhile, proponents of D.C. statehood would be thrilled to hear that the district has been abolished. (I used to work for a company based out of D.C. Consolidation seems to haunt me wherever I go…)
In fairness, if I were coming up with terminology for these phenomena, “consolidated” versus “merged” wouldn’t be my preferred naming scheme. They’re practically synonyms. I’d rather describe it as the difference between consolidation into a single jurisdiction per se versus consolidating only the territory and/or government authority.