ABC and Disney Sue FCC for First Amendment Retaliation Over Early License Renewals; Complaint Says No Candidate Has Appeared on The View Since February

On August 18, 2026 (filing date), ABC, Disney and ABC’s eight owned stations sued the FCC, Chairman Brendan Carr, Commissioners Anna Gomez and Olivia Trusty, and unnamed commissioners in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. v. FCC, No. 1:26-cv-02902 (Judge Loren L. AliKhan). The single count is First Amendment retaliation: the plaintiffs ask the court to declare the April early-renewal order retaliatory and to bar further action on the renewal applications, “including issuing a Hearing Designation Order.” They moved for a TRO and preliminary injunction the same day. Statements attributed to ABC below are pleadings, not findings.

What ABC alleges about the renewal order. The complaint says the Commission issued the order “the day after the President objected to additional on-air comments by Mr. Kimmel,” and that the Commission “had not called for a renewal application ahead of schedule in more than half a century.” It dates the President’s demand that Disney fire Kimmel to April 27, 2026 and the FCC order to the next day (see 2026-04-28–fcc-media-bureau-da-26-416-calls-in-abc-eight-station-licenses-for-early-renewal). On licence timing the complaint pleads that “the earliest expiration is not until 2028 (WTVD), and the latest are not until 2031,” so the call-in came years before ordinary renewal. It also describes a Bureau letter of inquiry dated July 2, 2026, issued while the renewal applications were pending, seeking internal communications of The View’s booking staff.

The admissions about The View (from the filed complaint): ABC pleads “No candidate for public office has appeared on The View since the Bureau’s February 2026 inquiry regarding Mr. Talarico’s appearance on February 2, 2026” (see 2026-02-19–fcc-investigates-abc-the-view-equal-time-violations); that the pressure led it to be “more circumspect in booking political candidates” and to pass on several candidates; and that it chose not to air clips it otherwise would have aired in the Hot Topics segment and the cold open. The same paragraph says the program’s editorial standards have not changed. These are the plaintiffs’ own statements about their own booking and clip decisions; the paragraph does not name the candidates passed over.

The FCC’s position. In its combined motion to dismiss, dated September 3, 2026, the government says the case “arises from an investigation of the FCC’s Enforcement Bureau into allegations of unlawful discrimination” by Disney, and that Disney’s responses to information requests “were deficient and nonresponsive.” The Media Bureau’s own public notice describes the investigation as concerning hiring, promotion and compensation practices (see the April 28 entry). The motion also contests the court’s jurisdiction and the plaintiffs’ showing of irreparable harm (headings in its table of contents).

Status. Judge AliKhan heard the TRO/PI motion and the motion to dismiss in early October; the minute entry records that the matters were taken under advisement and allowed supplemental filings, which both sides then made. No ruling appears on the RECAP docket copy read for this entry.

Pattern context. The suit puts a candidate-booking admission on the court record weeks before the midterms. It follows the September 2025 Kimmel suspension episode (see 2025-09-17–fcc-carr-threatens-abc-kimmel-suspension); weeks after the filing, Jimmy Kimmel Live moved a Talarico interview off broadcast, citing the FCC (see 2026-09-09–kimmel-moves-talarico-interview-to-youtube-citing-fcc-threats).

Research Gaps

• The hearing transcript (docketed, about a hundred pages) was not read; whether RECAP holds it is unknown.
• No ruling on the TRO/PI motion or the motion to dismiss as of the RECAP copy; re-check the docket.
• Petitions and oppositions filed in the FCC’s renewal docket were not read; the complaint refers to some seeking non-renewal on the basis of guests’ political affiliations.