Ray Seilie was recently quoted in an IndieWire article titled “Disney and ABC Pushing Back on the Trump FCC Is a Sneaky, Low-Risk Move That Could Make Them Look Like Heroes” where he examines Disney and ABC’s lawsuit against the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The lawsuit accuses the FCC of using its regulatory power to pressure ABC over programming and speech the Trump administration has criticized.
The claim centers on the FCC’s efforts to review the broadcast licenses of ABC’s eight owned stations earlier than expected. If the FCC ultimately decided to revoke those licenses, the stations could be forced off the air. Disney and ABC argue that the license review is being used to reprimand the network for its speech rather than for a legitimate regulatory reason.
Ray explains that Disney’s lawsuit is a relatively low-risk move for the company. If Disney wins, it could stop the FCC’s current efforts, while if Disney loses, the FCC would continue its review, and Disney could potentially challenge the agency again if it takes further action against the network.
“What Disney’s arguing here to try to get around is that the license renewal demand is actually a sham, that the FCC doesn’t have a good faith belief that ABC’s licenses should be revoked for whatever reason the FCC is allowed to revoke them,” Ray explains. “Therefore the court should step in now and not allow the Trump administration to use the burden and cost of a license renewal process to punish broadcasters who the Trump administration perceives to be expressing themselves in a way that they don’t like.”
According to Ray, the timing of the lawsuit is key. While there had previously been public criticism and threats against ABC, the FCC’s decision to begin reviewing the network’s licenses gave Disney something concrete to challenge in court. Ray also pointed to a recent Supreme Court decision involving the NRA as potential support for Disney’s argument that the government cannot use its regulatory power to put pressure on an organization because of its speech.
“They’re saying the precedent’s already been set. You’re not allowed to do this, and they’re hoping that they are on the right side of this legal issue,” Ray shares.
