ABC and its parent company Disney filed a First Amendment lawsuit against the Federal Communications Commission on Tuesday over what it called a “deeply un-American” effort by the Trump administration to punish broadcasters for airing speech critical of the president.

The suit comes in response to an April order by the FCC requiring Disney’s eight ABC stations to file their broadcast renewal requests years ahead of schedule. As the Knight First Amendment Institute pointed out, it’s the first time the FCC has ordered a broadcast station to submit early license renewals in more than 50 years.

The unusual request came after President Donald Trump had repeatedly suggested that networks giving him “negative coverage” should have their broadcast licenses “terminated.”

ABC has argued that the license renewal demand is part of an effort to “attack” its First Amendment-protected speech.

“Government censorship is deeply un-American,” the lawsuit, filed before the US District Court for the District of Columbia, said. “Acting through the Federal Communications Commission, the administration has waged a retaliatory campaign against ABC for a single reason: it disapproves of what ABC broadcasts.”

ABC specifically has found itself in the crosshairs of FCC Chair Brendan Carr, who used license authority to pressure the network to remove late-night host Jimmy Kimmel from the air briefly last year following a critical monologue about Trump and Republicans following the assassination of right-wing activist Charlie

The lawsuit quotes what ABC said were blatant efforts by Carr to “coerce” the network into pulling Kimmel, including his ultimatum, “We can do this the easy way or the hard way.”

It also notes that the request for the early renewal order was issued just one day after Trump went on another social media tirade against Kimmel over jokes he made about First Lady Melania Trump, which the president claimed inspired an assassination attempt at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner. Trump said that Kimmel should “be immediately fired by Disney and ABC.”

Carr has defended the FCC’s orders to Disney, stating that they were not about retaliation, but about ensuring that ABC stations operate “in the public interest” as they are required to do under law.

“If broadcasters don’t like that, that’s okay,” Carr told CNBC back in July. “They can become a cable channel, they can become a podcast, they can stream online. But if you want to uniquely be on the public’s airwaves, you have to comply with those obligations.”

Noting previous comments by Carr that public interest considerations should include the "political ideology” of a broadcaster’s programming, Monday’s lawsuit said the order “thus appears intended to broaden the scope of the agency’s review, including to impermissibly consider the content of ABC programming.”

Earlier this year, the FCC also opened an investigation into the daytime talk show The View, alleging that its hosting of interviews with Texas Democratic US Senate candidate James Talarico in February may have violated a rule requiring broadcast stations to give political candidates “equal time” when appearing on air.

ABC has contended that The View has previously been ruled as a “bona fide news interview” program, which is exempt from the rule.

As part of the investigation, the FCC Media Bureau has probed ABC’s editorial process, ordering it to produce internal communications among View staff, disclose the political donations of employees, and provide information about ABC’s internal guidance for producing interviews

The White House, meanwhile, includedThe View on a public webpage listing so-called “media offenders.” On this page, it singled out the program’s co-hosts for the “offenses” of criticizing government officials for “visiting the Alligator Alcatraz ICE detention facility in Florida” and “claiming President Trump was overstepping his authority by constructing a White House ballroom.”

The lawsuit says the FCC’s pressure has affected its editorial decision-making. It notes that since the investigation was launched, it has not booked any other congressional candidates on The View.

It also notes that, considering the “risk of resulting administration retaliation,” ABC chose to broadcast a speech by Trump in July on its streaming channel ABC News Live in which he made unfounded accusations of rampant voter fraud in the 2020 election, which “it ordinarily would not have done.”

Trump again called on the network to have its broadcast license stripped for not airing the speech on its main network. And Carr has said that the FCC would consider that decision as part of the review of ABC’s renewal applications.

The lawsuit says the administration is seeking either to mire the company in costly legal fees and intimidate it into compliance or to rip it off the air entirely, as Trump demanded.

“In either scenario,” the lawsuit says, “the administration accomplishes its goal of eliminating a perceived media critic: either it gets plaintiffs to fall in line, or it silences them if they refuse.”

The lawsuit asks the court to issue a temporary restraining order to prevent the FCC from proceeding with the reviews. It ultimately seeks a ruling that the license-renewal proceedings constitute unconstitutional retaliation that violates the First Amendment.

It notes that the administration has been attempting to coerce other legacy news broadcasters in the same way.

“If the administration gets its way, the message to every media company in the country will be unmistakable: Tell only the stories the administration deems favorable, or face the coercive machinery of the federal government,” the lawsuit says. “In such a world, the press could in no way be described as free.”

CNN’s chief media analyst Brian Stelter described Disney and ABC’s lawsuit as “one of the stiffest challenges from any American media company against the Trump administration during Trump’s return to office.”

Press freedom advocates welcomed the lawsuit as a sign that media outlets were beginning to fight back against the administration’s strong-arming tactics rather than appeasing them.

“At long last! A broadcast network has found a backbone and is suing to stop the administration’s bullying and censorship,” said Nico Perrino, the executive vice president of the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE).

“It’s about time for someone to take Carr and his FCC to court over their endless campaign of intimidation and retaliation against journalism that displeases Carr’s thin-skinned boss,” said Seth Stern, chief of advocacy for the Freedom of the Press Foundation.

“Carr knows the FCC is not the journalism police and said so regularly himself before he decided to throw away any integrity he once had to kiss up to Trump,” Stern added. "Countless others whose First Amendment rights have been chilled by Carr’s antics should follow Disney’s lead.”

ABC has faced criticism for bowing to pressure from Trump in the past. In 2024, after Trump won the presidential election, the network agreed to pay out $15 million after he sued over comments made by anchor George Stephanopoulos, who stated that the president had been found “liable for rape” by a jury when he’d technically only been found liable for “sexual abuse." The president’s case against the network was widely viewed as legally dubious.

That lawsuit was seen as an opening of the floodgates for Trump’s efforts to coerce and control the media during his second term, and other networks, fearful of retaliation, would follow with their own concessions to avoid his wrath.

Aaron Blake, a senior political reporter at CNN, said ABC’s decision to fight back against the FCC showed that “today, we’re in a different situation.”


From Common Dreams via This RSS Feed.