Kimmel Excluded in Seattle and Portland as Sinclair Preempts ABC Show

Jimmy Kimmel’s return to late-night television hit turbulence on Tuesday, as Sinclair-owned ABC affiliates in Seattle and Portland declined to air Jimmy Kimmel Live! and preempted the late-night program with local news. The move comes as ABC parent company Disney said it would allow the show to return following a suspension sparked by comments the host made about the death of Charlie Kirk, a bench mark moment in a broader dispute over the boundaries of political commentary on network television. In Seattle and Portland, viewers found that Kimmel’s program would not be on the air across Sinclair’s ABC stations beginning Tuesday night, with the company stating that it would replace the program with news programming while discussions with ABC continue about whether the show will return.

Sinclair, which owns 38 ABC affiliates across 18 states, has previously maintained that it would not lift the suspension until formal discussions were held with ABC regarding the network’s commitment to professionalism and accountability. The broadcaster also called on Kimmel to issue a direct apology to the Kirk family and to make a meaningful personal donation to the Kirk Family and Turning Point USA, the conservative campus group founded by Kirk. The stance from Sinclair has fueled online petitions and social-media debates, with critics framing the decision as a punitive response to a late-night host whose political leanings differ from the station group’s corporate posture.

Disney, the parent company of ABC, announced that after days of thoughtful conversations with Kimmel, the network had reached a decision to return the show on Tuesday. A Disney spokesperson indicated the discussions with Kimmel had focused on whether the host’s remarks had crossed lines that warranted suspension, and that the parties had agreed to move forward with the show’s reinstatement. Andrew Kolvet, a spokesperson for Turning Point USA, reacted to the reinstatement on X, saying that Disney and ABC caving to pressure by allowing Kimmel back on the air was not surprising, but that Nexstar and Sinclair would not be bound to make the same choice. There was no immediate comment from Nexstar on its plans for Kimmel’s return.

Kimmel’s suspension followed remarks in a monologue about Kirk, who was killed on September 10. In the monologue, Kimmel said that “many in MAGA land are working very hard to capitalize on the murder of Charlie Kirk” and that the “MAGA gang” was “desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them.” The statements drew swift criticism from Republicans and conservatives and prompted questions about the line between satire and incitement in late-night television.

The episode’s fate adds to a broader narrative about political influence on broadcast television. CNN media analyst Brian Stelter described Sinclair’s decision as part of the “slow unspooling of broadcast TV,” highlighting how corporate ownership can complicate a local affiliate’s programming choices. In Seattle, some residents reacted with online expressions of disappointment as KOMO, the local ABC affiliate, indicated it would not air Kimmel while the network and Sinclair worked through the matter. A social media post from a local user read that Seattle’s audience had learned the show would not return to KOMO’s lineup, prompting reflections on the city’s stance toward the network’s decision.

On the conservative side, Trump supporters and allied commentators weighed in online. Former President Donald Trump himself criticized the situation on social media, posting about the suspension and urging that other late-night hosts be held to account. The Trump-aligned critique framed the matter as a broader debacle in which media figures are perceived to be shielded by political loyalties rather than held to universal standards of accountability.

Political and media observers noted that the timing of the suspension occurred as the administration and regulatory voices weighed in on media conduct. Brendan Carr, the head of the Federal Communications Commission, had issued a warning ahead of Kimmel’s suspension, suggesting that networks could face consequences if they fail to address problematic remarks. Carr later said he did not threaten to revoke ABC’s licenses; instead, he attributed the suspension to ratings and the network’s own internal standards rather than federal coercion. The remarks added context to a year in which deregulatory conversations and debates over media influence have peppered Capitol Hill and newsroom forums alike.

Reaction to Kimmel’s reinstatement was divided along ideological lines. Supporters of the host celebrated the return as a victory for free expression, while critics argued that the suspension underscored the volatility of political commentary in entertainment television. Kim’s case has also touched on a broader discussion about how networks respond to controversial remarks, how much leverage corporate ownership wields over local affiliates, and where the line should be drawn between satire, opinion, and accountability.

As the Tuesday programming slate unfolds, the question remains whether Kimmel will ultimately return to all Sinclair-affiliated markets or whether the negotiations with ABC will lead to a broader rethinking of how late-night fare is scheduled in cities with diverse political climates. Disney has not indicated any additional conditions beyond the discussions that led to the reinstatement, and Sinclair has not publicly altered its policy since the initial announcement. In Seattle and Portland, viewers will still see local newscasts during the former late-night window as negotiations continue, with the possibility of future changes depending on the evolving stance of the two media groups.

In the broader media ecosystem, the Kimmel case underscores how political alignment, corporate ownership, and regulatory considerations can shape the content that reaches audiences on broadcast platforms. For fans of late-night television, the ongoing conversation signals that familiar faces may face new hurdles in markets where ownership groups push back against certain kinds of commentary. For now, the clock ticks toward Tuesday’s broadcast window, when the ultimate fate of Jimmy Kimmel Live! in Sinclair’s ABC markets may hinge on the outcomes of the discussions between the executive suites at Sinclair and ABC.