The ABC network and its parent company Disney brought their legal battle against the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to a federal court in Washington on Tuesday, where they requested a temporary restraining order to halt the preemptive review of the broadcast licenses of eight of their stations.
The ABC attorney, Beth Wilkinson, argued that this is an unconstitutional retaliation driven by the Trump administration, in a hearing held before the U.S. District Court Judge for the District of Columbia, Loren AliKhan.
So far, the judge has not issued an immediate ruling and has requested additional submissions from both parties: the government by October 9 and ABC by October 14. A decision is not expected before mid-month.
Wilkinson turned to a historical image to describe the effect that the process is already having on the chain: having the "head in the guillotine," forced to wonder "if anything we say will cause it to fall."
"Our editorial decisions are being affected right now. We are monitoring everything we do," he stated before the judge, emphasizing that the midterm elections are approaching.
Wilkinson was more direct in attributing the political motivation behind the measure: "President Donald Trump has made his position clear time and time again. What he says is that, because of that content, because of that discourse, ABC should lose its license. These are flagrant violations of the U.S. Constitution."
In their lawsuit, the attorneys for the network claim that "the First Amendment requires an immediate end to the Commission's retaliatory campaign."
The origin of the dispute dates back to late April 2026, when the president of the FCC, Brendan Carr —a Trump ally— ordered eight ABC stations to submit license renewal applications years ahead of schedule, as these do not expire until between 2028 and 2031.
The order arrived a day after Trump publicly demanded the dismissal of host Jimmy Kimmel following a satirical comment about Melania Trump.
Carr denied acting under political pressure and attributed the review to an investigation lasting nearly a year into Disney's diversity, equity, and inclusion policies and possible violations of the Communications Act of 1934.
The affected stations are 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 renewal requests in May "under protest," calling the measure "arbitrary, illegal, and unconstitutional." The formal lawsuit was filed in August in the same court.
The government outright rejected ABC's arguments. The attorney from the Department of Justice, Dimitar Georgiev-Remmel, raised two main objections: that the district court lacks jurisdiction —because challenges to FCC orders must be submitted to a federal court of appeals— and that ABC has not demonstrated irreparable harm, since the eight licenses remain active.
Granting the precautionary measure, he argued, would be equivalent to "allowing them to evade" the regulatory process that Congress established for this type of resource.
In response, Wilkinson specified what he believes to be the real harm: "The irreparable harm is the chilling effect and the threat of retaliation due to First Amendment speech and the editorial decisions that ABC makes every day."
The case falls within a broader pattern of conflicts between the Trump administration and media outlets. In September, the White House prohibited access to CNN, MS NOW, and Politico, which filed a lawsuit against the government days later.
Trump also proposed in December 2025 that networks with "almost 100% negative" coverage of him should lose their broadcasting licenses.
The attorneys from the Department of Justice warned in their court filing that preventing the FCC from "using all the tools at its disposal to investigate whether the plaintiffs meet their legal and regulatory obligations would cause serious harm to both the government and the public."
Related videos:
Filed under: