Deadline has reported that ABC has filed a claim against the FCC, alleging that the government body has violated the company’s First Amendment rights. ABC believes that the FCC has taken actions as part of a “retaliatory campaign” against the network”.
The lawsuit also asks to stop the ongoing proceeding in which Brendan Carr has required eight of ABC’s stations to file for early renewal. The request for early renewal followed several online bouts between the President and late-night host Jimmy Kimmel (Smurfs, Jimmy Kimmel Live!).
“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,” the lawsuit alleges per Deadline.
The lawsuit claims that ABC has been backed into a corner. The Trump-appointed FCC poses an “existential threat” to the company, and it was left no choice but to pursue legal action.
The lawsuit cites all the different times the president has aired his grievances about the network, including the instance where a moderator asked about the release of the Epstein files during an ABC-moderated debate. Additionally, Trump has frequently complained about late-night hosts targeting him during monologues and other segments.
ABC’s legal action further delves into Carr threatening ABC last year after Kimmel made comments about the alleged shooter of Charlie Kirk. Carr said, “We can do this the easy way or the hard way,” per Deadline.
ABC apparently expected action on early renewals after public comments from the FCC. The FCC could decide in a hearing designation as early as this month, according to Bloomberg. This would then begin the formal adjudication process, which will decide the ultimate fate of ABC’s licenses.
The lawsuit expanded on how the adjudication, even without a final decision, could impact the network’s free speech: “Any FCC adjudication would be a charade. The Commission cannot lawfully grant renewal this early in the license terms—the only outcomes on the table are adverse to Plaintiffs. At one extreme, the Commission may intentionally prolong the adjudicative process, miring ABC in years of costly litigation, with the threat of adverse action ever present and with every editorial judgment shadowed by the prospect of provoking the Administration into further retaliation,” per Deadline.
“At another extreme, the Commission may use the hearing to deny license renewal or immediately revoke the Stations’ licenses, forcing Plaintiffs off the air entirely, as the President has repeatedly demanded. In either scenario, 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 continued, according to Deadline.
President Biden appointed US District Court Judge Loren L. AliKhan is to preside over the case. She has required both defendants and plaintiffs to file a joint status report regarding the start time of the litigation.
Carr has defended the early renewal action by referencing an investigation into Disney’s Diversity, Equity and Inclusion practices. Carr has stated that while Disney and ABC are cooperating, they “simply begat increasingly aggressive demands.” ABC retorted that the decision not to air Trump’s prime time address would also be part of the review.
“The Commission’s true target is not the Stations’ employment practices or their carriage of a single presidential address; it is the content of Plaintiffs’ programming—and thus their speech. “Because the Commission cannot regulate that content directly, it has used its review of the Stations’ licenses as an instrument to the same end,” the Lawsuit said, according to Deadline.
An FCC spokesperson responded to the lawsuit: “All broadcasters have a legal obligation to operate in the public interest—even Disney. The FCC has been examining claims that Disney engaged in illegal DEI discrimination for over a year. Disney is obviously very concerned about the FCC’s proceeding, as evidenced by its ongoing disinformation campaign and its decision to ask a court to stop the FCC from pursuing the matter further. The FCC will continue to follow the facts and law wherever they lead,” via Deadline.
The lawsuit names Carr and the two commissioners as defendants. Anna Gomez, the lone Democratic commissioner, appears to be named solely out of protocol. The complaint utilizes some of Gomez’s language about the current agency as justification.
ABC and Disney are asking for a temporary restraining order and an immediate stop to any action used to “to coerce or threaten” regarding the network’s editorial discretion. Beth Wilkinson, who is also defending Paramount against their lawsuit from the WGA and the states, takes the lead for ABC and Disney.
The legal team for ABC wrote, “The visible target and suffers the most immediate harm, but the message is addressed to every broadcaster in the country, and the press bears the ultimate cost as a whole.” The lawsuit warned that “news organizations throughout the country are also watching and waiting to see the extent to which ABC and the Stations will be punished, as promised, for coverage that the Administration has deemed unfavorable—because if it happens to ABC, they could be next,” per Deadline.
Other former voices from inside the FCC have spoken out on Disney and ABC’s complaint; former FCC chairman Gigi Sohn wrote in a post to X, “People need to understand what a big deal this is. Disney is doing what many of us had urged for many months – taking on the FCC’s weaponization of its regulatory power,” according to Deadline.
In a separate investigation, the FCC is also looking into The View’s alleged violation of equal time rules. The network has stated that The View has yet to host another political candidate since James Talarico out of fear of reprisal.
Before the early renewal action, ABC’s licenses were not set for review until 2028. Since the proceedings began, the network has launched an on-air campaign to drum up support. The campaign has resulted in 78,000 comments on The View investigation and 153,000 on the early license renewal.
Despite being named in the lawsuit, Gomez has issued support for Disney’s legal action, saying the lawsuit “should be a welcome sign for every broadcaster who has felt the weight of this overreaching government pressure in silence,” per Deadline.
She continued, “I am hopeful that this will mark the beginning of the end of this administration’s disregard for the Constitution and the law, and that the coming months will bring the costly legal defeat this agency has been asking for since it started down this path,” according to Deadline.
ABC has cited a 2024 Supreme Court decision that ruled government officials could not use regulatory actions to manipulate the actions of private entities. The 2024 case involved a New York official coercing insurance companies to end their relationships with the NRA. The court stated government officials “use the power of the state to punish or suppress disfavored expression.”
According to Deadline, ABC and Disney have argued that their First Amendment rights have been obstructed. “Each time an ABC journalist publishes a story or an ABC host interviews a political guest, they must wonder whether that speech might lead the administration to follow through on its threat of license revocation or impose some other sanction,” the legal team wrote.