I would not blame dang for keeping that flagged. The quality of the one on Gaza was appalling, it must have been really hard to moderate one and this one wasn't going to be much better.

If only; he is not.

Huq is a U Chicago professor of con law and understands what is happening [1]. He is just having a really bad lawyer brain moment as the eroading rule of law crosses the line he probably uses in class as an example of "too far."

1: https://www.law.uchicago.edu/news/aziz-huq-writes-about-libe...

> there's not much indication that they were even contacted by the FCC

Brendan Carr: "This is a very, very serious issue right now for Disney. We can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies can find ways to take action on Kimmel, or there is going to be additional work for the FCC ahead."

Nice merger you have planned there, sure would be a shame if something were to happen to it.

There's at least the appearance of causation here, with the FCC Chairman publicly saying that broadcasters could get their licenses yanked if they didn't drop Kimmel, and later that suddenly occurring.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/18/entertainment/abc-jimmy-kimme...

I imagine a smoking gun will be demanded by this SCOTUS though, and this kind of stochastic "would be nice if someone..." pressure/threat will get a pass.

The supreme court punted with Murthy vs Missouri (https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-411_3dq3.pdf) but it would be harder for them to use the standing excuse in this case. Also, Alito and Gorsuch were dissenting in this case so presumably you would hope that if a similar case appeared they would be consistent and side with the plaintiffs. I think for those in favour of a free speech ruling there is real hope for a positive outcome.

> he's going to have some pretty high evidentiary hurdles

Hmm, with ABC or the government? (Can individuals claim damages in court against the government for First Amendment violations?)

If it were found Carr was acting unconstitutionally, and thus clearly outside the colour of law, could he be found personally liable?

(Side note: thank you, this is what I was hoping for when I posted this here.)

Emails from ABC, Nexstar, and the FCC may shed some light on things. See also: Dominion and Fox.

FWiW Carr won't even (yet, at least) be bought to testify before the Oversight Committee despite his comments that were clearly in breach (regardless of whether they had influence in the decision to suspend).

See: Republicans Kill Attempt to Subpoena FCC Chair After Jimmy Kimmel Suspension https://talkingpointsmemo.com/where-things-stand/republicans...

and other sources.

Berenson v. Biden was dismissed.

[flagged]

Haha not only is Disney submitting to the bullying they are now making up a story to protect the bully.

Riiiiiiiiight, I totally believe that.

Turns out corporate merger > constitution

>Since that was written, Disney evidently published the back story that, days earlier, they were looking to fire Kimmel themselves

source?

Yes, but Roberts really doesn't want to be worse than the Taney court. Throwing out freedom of speech with the first amendment would probably put him down there.

He has a right to say whatever he says, but surely his private employer have a right to fire him for it?

He has a right to speak his mind, not to have a show.

[dead]

No, lawsuits are civil and pardons are criminal.

> He gets to go down looking like he’s fighting instead of unentertaining.

Even better: he uses the opportunity to make it clear that any kind of comment that is out of line with the administration will not be tolerated.

He didn't go down fighting. He went out demonstrating the consequence of not agreeing.

How does any other media personality know that it's "kayfabe"?

The chilling effect is not "kayfabe".

On the other hand, this fits a very consistent pattern with the administration and businesses or personalities that it deems critical.

Plus of you're going out in a blaze, it's something more substantive than what he said.

Kayfabe is when the events are scripted by people who are working together even as they play enemies in the show and where everybody involved knows it is fake and plays along anyway.

Do you believe that Trump and Kimmel are actually coordinating this behind the scenes? Do you believe that the large majority of both of their audiences understand this to be a show rather than reality?

It’s amazing to me that every time something like this happens some people paint it as some grand conspiracy and 4D chess move involving a large set of people. It’s like 4chan leaking all over the Internet.

What's antifa? have they arrested the antifa leader yet?

Did this antifa compile lists of "enemy" professors in colleges and media for their supporters to attack?.. No, that was Charlie that did that.

>As is comparing it to a recently assassinated political leader.

Charlie wasn't a political leader he was podcaster making money off advertising. I realize the line is a little blurred for you but the difference is a politician is someone that runs in elections.

The ACLU, for one.