ABC Seeks Court Order to Halt FCC's Early Television License Review

The broadcasting network ABC, along with its parent company Disney, took their ongoing legal battle against the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to a federal court in Washington on Tuesday. They are seeking an injunction to stop the premature review of broadcasting licenses for eight of their stations.

During the hearing, ABC's attorney Beth Wilkinson argued that the move is an unconstitutional act of retaliation instigated by the Trump administration. This was presented before U.S. District Judge for the District of Columbia, Loren AliKhan.

As of now, Judge AliKhan has not issued an immediate ruling and has requested additional briefs from both parties. The government is required to submit by October 9, while ABC has until October 14. A decision isn't anticipated until the middle of the month.

Wilkinson employed a vivid historical metaphor to illustrate the pressure ABC is under, comparing it to having its "head in the guillotine," forced to consider whether anything they say will trigger its fall.

"Our editorial choices are being influenced right now. We're scrutinizing everything we do," she emphasized to the judge, highlighting the looming midterm elections.

Wilkinson was explicit in attributing the political motives behind the measure: "President Donald Trump has repeatedly made his stance clear. He asserts that, because of our content and speech, ABC should lose its license. These are blatant violations of the U.S. Constitution."

The network's legal team asserts in their lawsuit that "the First Amendment demands an immediate stop to the Commission's campaign of retaliation."

The dispute's origins trace back to late April 2026, when FCC Chairman Brendan Carr—a Trump ally—ordered eight ABC stations to file license renewal applications years ahead of schedule. These licenses don't expire until between 2028 and 2031.

This directive came a day after Trump publicly called for the firing of host Jimmy Kimmel following a satirical remark about Melania Trump.

Carr denied acting under political pressure, attributing the review to a nearly year-long investigation into Disney's diversity, equity, and inclusion policies and potential violations of the 1934 Communications Act.

The stations in question include WABC-TV (New York), KABC-TV (Los Angeles), WLS-TV (Chicago), WPVI-TV (Philadelphia), KTRK-TV (Houston), KGO-TV (San Francisco), WTVD-TV (Raleigh-Durham), and KFSN-TV (Fresno).

ABC submitted the eight license renewal applications in May "under protest," labeling the action as "arbitrary, unlawful, and unconstitutional." The formal lawsuit followed in August in the same court.

The government staunchly rejected ABC's arguments. Justice Department attorney Dimitar Georgiev-Remmel raised two main objections: the district court lacks jurisdiction—since FCC order challenges should be filed in a federal appellate court—and ABC hasn't shown irreparable harm, as the licenses remain valid.

Granting the injunction, Georgiev-Remmel argued, would "allow them to bypass" the regulatory process Congress established for such appeals.

In response, Wilkinson clarified what she believes is the actual harm: "The irreparable damage is the chilling effect and threat of retaliation for First Amendment speech and the editorial decisions ABC makes daily."

This case is part of a broader pattern of clashes between the Trump administration and media outlets. In September, the White House barred access to CNN, MS NOW, and Politico, prompting these organizations to sue the government days later.

Trump also suggested in December 2025 that networks with "nearly 100% negative" coverage of him should lose their broadcasting licenses.

Justice Department attorneys cautioned in their court brief that preventing the FCC from "utilizing all tools at its disposal to investigate if the plaintiffs are meeting their legal and regulatory obligations would cause significant harm to both the government and the public."