Disney braces for court battle with Trump after reinstating Jimmy Kimmel
Company faces political and regulatory headwinds as it resumes Kimmel amid threats to revoke broadcast licenses and new regulatory pressure
Disney reinstated late-night host Jimmy Kimmel on Tuesday night, ending a weeklong suspension prompted by remarks about the killing of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. The move sets up a potential confrontation with national political figures and regulators, as President Donald Trump and FCC Chair Brendan Carr have threatened to revoke Disney's broadcast licenses if the network keeps Kimmel on the air. The decision, reported by AP and Bloomberg, came after Disney executives weighed the political and regulatory risks of sustaining the suspension.
Disney had anticipated retaliation from the White House if it sided with Kimmel, according to two people familiar with the company’s strategy cited by Bloomberg. The company consulted with legal advisers and came away confident it could fend off any effort to suspend its licenses. Trump and Carr have threatened to yank licenses from Disney-owned local stations and affiliates. Carr warned station groups that keeping Kimmel on air could jeopardize their licenses, saying affiliates had the right to preempt. Two major affiliate groups — Nexstar Media Group and Sinclair Broadcast Group — dropped Kimmel from schedules covering nearly a quarter of the country, and neither has reinstated the program.
Disney also faces broader regulatory and business pressures as it navigates deals beyond late-night television. The company is seeking regulatory clearances for NFL media-rights ventures and a Hulu–FuboTV merger, with the FCC delaying a decision on Paramount Global’s merger with Skydance Media while Trump pursues a separate defamation case against CBS News. Industry observers note that revoking a broadcast license would be a lengthy process subject to court challenge.
Inside Disney, CEO Bob Iger and entertainment co-chair Dana Walden personally supervised Kimmel’s suspension and return, and the network described the host’s remarks as ill-timed and insensitive. Former Disney chief Michael Eisner publicly blasted Iger’s decision to sideline Kimmel, accusing ABC of bowing to pressure from regulators and political figures. Carr defended his warnings, saying affiliates had the right to pull programming if it did not serve the public interest. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) slammed Carr’s comments as sounding like a mob shakedown. 
Industry veterans say revoking a broadcast license would be a lengthy, litigation-prone process. “Under our Constitution and the Communications Act, you cannot lose your FCC license for broadcasting something the president doesn’t like,” said Preston Padden, a former ABC Television president, in a Bloomberg interview. The remarks underscore the legal and regulatory storm surrounding Disney’s media empire as it presses ahead with other business moves. The Post has sought comment from Disney and the White House. 
The episode also echoes past high-stakes encounters between Disney and presidential oversight. Last year, Disney agreed to pay $16 million to resolve a defamation suit Trump had filed against ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos. That settlement has shaped how Disney approaches controversial commentary and regulatory scrutiny as it weighs future programming decisions. The company’s leaders have emphasized a commitment to safeguarding editorial independence while navigating a highly charged political environment. The Post has sought comment from Disney and the White House as the dispute unfolds.
The political dimension of Disney’s decision to reinstate Kimmel is yet another flare-up in a broader fight over media power, content regulation and how federal authorities respond when prominent outlets challenge a sitting president. Trump has signaled a willingness to pursue aggressive actions against entities he deems unfriendly, raising the stakes for Disney and its affiliate networks. For now, Disney employees and investors alike will watch closely as regulators decide whether any real consequences will follow for the network’s licenses and if the White House will pursue further legal challenges to the company’s programming choices.