For months, the Walt Disney Company and President Trump’s Federal Communications Commission have traded accusations in a battle over the company’s free speech rights and its local broadcast stations.
Now they are taking their conflict to federal court.
On Tuesday morning, Disney lawyers are expected to ask a judge in U.S. District Court in Washington to prevent the F.C.C. from undertaking an unusual, early review of the broadcast licenses of the eight stations the company owns and operates. Disney, which owns ABC, has called the review — and possible revocation — of the licenses an existential threat to its operations and an “extraordinary assault” on its First Amendment rights.
The F.C.C., which is run by a Trump appointee, Brendan Carr, will ask the judge to throw out the lawsuit because the agency has yet to make a decision on the fate of the licenses.
The showdown is the latest salvo in Mr. Trump’s campaign to punish media companies, which has included barring news organizations from the White House, enacting reporting restrictions, suing news outlets and, in the case of the broadcast networks, unleashing the regulatory power of the federal government.
ABC has been in the cross hairs of the Trump administration for well over a year, with Mr. Carr scrutinizing the network’s daytime talk show, “The View,” and its late-night program “Jimmy Kimmel Live!”
The F.C.C. took its boldest step in April when it announced that it would review Disney’s eight local broadcast licenses in cities including New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco and Philadelphia. Under communications law, stations operate under the purview of the F.C.C., with licenses that are renewed every eight years. None of ABC’s station licenses are up for review until 2028 at the earliest. (Most are valid until 2030 and 2031.)
The bar is exceedingly high for the F.C.C. to strip away licenses, and it has never launched such a broad challenge to a major network’s owned stations. Mr. Carr has said the review stems from an investigation into Disney’s diversity and inclusion employment practices. Disney’s lawyers were quick to point out that Mr. Carr took the action immediately after Mr. Trump publicly expressed anger at a monologue joke by Mr. Kimmel on his program.
Under agency rules, Mr. Carr can inflict plenty of pain on the company while the F.C.C. undergoes its review. He could, for example, call for a hearing where he or other agency commissioners would grill Disney executives about their operations and their editorial decision-making. Disney lawyers said any such hearing would be “a charade.”
Public policy and legal experts have said ABC would have strong legal grounds to fight such a move in court. But it was widely assumed that ABC had little recourse until the F.C.C. made a formal determination, which, under standard legal procedure, ABC could contest at the appellate court level.
In August, Disney filed the surprise lawsuit, asking the District Court to intervene before the F.C.C. could call a hearing or reach a conclusion.
“This case boils down to a simple question: Can the administration use its control over the federal regulatory apparatus to punish a media organization for editorial decisions and news coverage it dislikes?” the lawsuit said. “Because the First Amendment provides a clear answer — of course not — this court’s intervention is necessary to stop the Federal Communications Commission’s extraordinary assault on free speech.”
Company lawyers also said the “process is itself the punishment,” arguing that the F.C.C. could slow-walk a final decision, leaving the network in limbo while legal costs skyrocketed and its editorial decisions remained under a microscope.
Legal experts are split on ABC’s chances of success. Supporters of Mr. Carr say the F.C.C. could persuasively argue that ABC was seeking to short-circuit the ordinary legal process, while F.C.C. opponents say ABC has a good chance of persuading the court that the agency’s proceedings were in fact infringing on ABC’s rights. Legal experts agree that ABC’s success in the case will hinge on making a convincing argument that it is suffering immediate harm through the F.C.C.’s adjudication process.
In court papers, Disney described exhaustive requests by the F.C.C. — more than 600, generating more than 13,000 pages of documents in response — to detail the company’s employment practices, as well as another inquiry about the type of political guests “The View” can book.
Disney said in legal filings that because of the F.C.C. inquiry, producers on “The View” have become more circumspect about booking political guests or even showing video clips of some political candidates on the program, arguing that this was “a concrete First Amendment injury.” (Last month, Mr. Kimmel announced that he would show an interview with the Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate in Texas, James Talarico, online but not on his program because of the F.C.C. threats.)
For its part, the F.C.C. has accused Disney of spreading “disinformation,” and of seeking to use the courts to short-circuit the agency’s investigation into its diversity and inclusion practices.
“Holding a broadcaster accountable to their public interest obligations and statutory obligations is not a violation of their First Amendment rights, and that is what the F.C.C. is doing,” Mr. Carr told The New York Times after Disney sued.
Since taking over the F.C.C. in January 2025, Mr. Carr has gone about reviving century-old public interest regulations that were devised when radio and television were the primary means of mass communications. He has argued that many of the regulations have gone without enforcement for too long.
Disney’s legal team includes Beth Wilkinson, a veteran trial lawyer, and Paul D. Clement, a solicitor general under President George W. Bush and an experienced Supreme Court litigator. Ms. Wilkinson will lead the arguments for Disney and ABC on Tuesday.
The judge overseeing the case is Loren L. AliKhan, who was appointed by President Joseph R. Biden Jr. in 2023.
The post Battle Between Disney and the F.C.C. Moves to the Courts appeared first on New York Times.
