ABC dramatically escalated its fight with the Federal Communications Commission on Thursday, accusing the government agency of using an early review of the network’s local TV station licenses to punish the Disney-owned broadcaster over its journalism in what it called an unprecedented threat to press freedom.
In a sweeping 109-page filing, ABC argued the FCC’s review of its eight owned-and-operated stations has evolved far beyond the agency’s stated investigation into Disney’s diversity, equity and inclusion policies. Instead, the company contends, the proceeding has become an effort to pressure a major news organization over editorial decisions the Trump administration dislikes.
“The retaliation against ABC is a signal to every media company in the country: accommodate the Administration’s view of what news coverage should look like or pay the price,” the company wrote in the filing. “The tools vary; the objective does not: a media industry too fearful of official reprisal to report the news freely.”
The filing marks the sharpest legal challenge yet in a months-long confrontation between ABC and FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. In April, Carr directed the network to seek early renewal of the broadcast licenses for its eight owned stations as part of the commission’s investigation into Disney’s DEI practices. ABC submitted the applications “under protest,” calling the order “unlawful, arbitrary and unconstitutional.”
Carr has maintained the review stems from the FCC’s investigation into Disney’s DEI policies. But during his monthly press conference this week, he also suggested ABC’s decision to limit coverage of President Donald Trump’s primetime address could factor into the proceeding, further fueling ABC’s claim that the review is tied to editorial decisions.
Now, ABC is arguing the review itself violates the First Amendment and could set a precedent extending well beyond Disney.
“There is no question why the Commission is singling out these eight stations,” ABC wrote. “Each is owned by ABC, and the Administration has openly and repeatedly called for the revocation of ABC’s licenses because it dislikes the content and viewpoints expressed on ABC network programs.”
The network also sought to undercut claims that its stations are not serving the public interest by pointing to what it described as overwhelming public support. According to the filing, more than 150,000 comments have been submitted in the proceeding, with more than 95% backing the stations’ license renewals. The company said approximately 370 local organizations and 236 elected officials have also urged the FCC to preserve the normal renewal process, compared with only a handful of groups opposing the applications.
ABC also pointed to growing bipartisan criticism of the proceeding. Earlier this week, former FCC chairs and top agency officials from both sides of the political aisle called on Carr to end the license review, calling it the “latest attack in a sustained campaign” to threaten broadcasts whose speech President Trump does not like.
The dispute has expanded beyond the station licenses. The FCC has separately launched an inquiry into whether “The View” qualifies for the agency’s “bona fide” news exemption under federal equal-time rules, while Carr accused Disney and ABC of running a “campaign of misinformation” through on-air advertisements encouraging viewers to weigh in on the commission’s proceedings.
Responding to ABC’s filing, an FCC spokesperson defended the commission’s review, saying broadcasters receive free use of the public airwaves in exchange for operating in the public interest and complying with federal law, including political equal opportunity requirements, prohibitions on certain forms of discrimination and rules against broadcast news distortion.
“The FCC is going to hold broadcasters accountable to the full extent of the law, regardless of any disinformation campaign that some of them may choose to run,” the spokesperson said.
The FCC is expected to decide after the Aug. 5 comment deadline whether to grant the renewals or designate the licenses for a hearing, setting up what could become one of the most significant First Amendment clashes between a federal regulator and a major U.S. media company in years.
