On Sept. 17, 2025, when the nation was celebrating Constitution Day, ABC News, which is owned by Walt Disney Co., announced that it was indefinitely suspending comedian and talk show host Jimmy Kimmel and his long-running program “Jimmy Kimmel Live!”
It did so for comments that Kimmel made about the murder of Charlie Kirk, a conservative provocateur who was gunned down last week at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah.
Kimmel’s comments
During his monologue on Monday night, Kimmel said: “We had some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it.”
Kimmel also poked at Trump directly, showing a video clip of a reporter asking Trump how he was holding up after Kirk’s death. Trump responded that he was fine then quickly started talking about construction of a ballroom at the White House. “He’s at the fourth stage of grief: construction,” Kimmel joked.
Trump and other conservatives have blamed Kirk’s murder on the “radical left” and said their rhetoric has inspired violence, including the shooting of Kirk. They and others have said they will root out and prosecute the organizations that are fomenting such violence.
FCC chairman threatens to take action
As a private employer, ABC has every right (other than those that might relate to contracts), to suspend a show even if it involves employee speech. A company might be especially prompted to take such action if that speech affects its bottom line.
Some have criticized Kimmel’s suspension as an example of the kind of “cancel culture” based on First Amendment expression that Republicans decried when used against them.
But Kimmel’s suspension is also complicated by the fact that ABC made its move after Brendan Carr, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, told an interviewer, “We can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies can find ways to change conduct and take actions on Kimmel, or there’s going to be additional work for the FCC ahead.”
He has said that the FCC has the authority to enforce the broadcasters’ public interest obligations that come with getting a broadcasting license from the government.
ABC affiliate groups take a stand against Kimmel’s comments
The FCC issues individual broadcast licenses to local broadcast and radio stations, not to their national networks like ABC.
In the Kimmel case, ABC faced pressure from its affiliate stations in local markets.
For example, Nexstar Media Group, which operates 33 ABC affiliates around the country, announced on Wednesday that its television stations would preempt ‘Jimmy Kimmel Live!’ for the foreseeable future.
“Mr. Kimmel’s comments about the death of Mr. Kirk are offensive and insensitive at a critical time in our national political discourse, and we do not believe they reflect the spectrum of opinions, views, or values of the local communities in which we are located,” said Andrew Alford, President of Nexstar’s broadcasting division in a press release. “Continuing to give Mr. Kimmel a broadcast platform in the communities we serve is simply not in the public interest at the current time, and we have made the difficult decision to preempt his show in an effort to let cooler heads prevail as we move toward the resumption of respectful, constructive dialogue.”
(Nexstar itself is currently seeking FCC approval over its plan to acquire Tegna, a major media rival.)
ABC’s largest affiliate group owner, Sinclair Inc., also objected to Kimmel’s comments, calling them “inappropriate and deeply insensitive at a critical moment for our country.” It planned to pull the show and air a special remembrance of Charlie Kirk during Jimmy Kimmel’s timeslot on Friday.
Broadcasters under pressure from lawsuits by Trump
ABC News had already this year agreed to pay $15 million to help finance Trump’s presidential library to settle a defamation action over an inaccurate statement made by George Stephanopoulos on air. Stephanopoulos had said that Trump had raped E. Jean Carroll when a court had found only that Trump was civilly liable for sexually abusing her.
Likewise, Paramount, which owns CBS, paid $16 million to Trump over allegations, disputed by many First Amendment authorities, that it had improperly edited an interview with presidential candidate Kamala Harris in an attempt to influence the election in her favor and against Trump.
More recently, Trump filed a $15 billion suit against The New York Times for what he has claimed is defamation. Although the chance that Trump will win this suit based on current interpretations of First Amendment freedoms seems minimal, the suit is likely to have a chilling effect on speech by less well-heeled news sources that do not have the resources to respond effectively to such actions.
Other firings for comments about Kirk murder
Kimmel is far from alone in facing consequences over his commentary on Kirk’s murder.
Several employees of higher educational institutions, news organizations and other businesses who were viewed as responding callously to the assassination of Charlie Kirk on social media have been fired or disciplined.
Is this a major inflection point?
Many commentators have viewed the assassination of Charlie Kirk as an inflection point that will determine the degree to which Americans will accept or reject political violence. It is possible that this event and responses could also mark a trend toward significant intrusions on First Amendment rights.
Further Developments
After a brief hiatus in which it was severely criticized by other comedians and those concerned about the First Amendment, ABC decided to reinstate Kimmel’s program, which began again on September 23, 2025. Stations owned by Sinclair Broadcast Group and Nexstar Media Groups, however, refused to air it. In the first new broadcast, which still played to a huge audience, Kimmel indicated that he had not meant to belittle Kirk’s death, defended the First Amendment, and stressed the importance of First Amendment freedoms.
John R. Vile is a political science professor at Middle Tennessee State University. He writes frequently on First Amendment issues.