FCC commissioner says Trump call to revoke ABC, NBC licenses is unconstitutional

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: Reuters

July 17, 2026 2:28 PM EDT Updated 3 hours ago


WASHINGTON, July 17 (Reuters) - The sole Democrat on the Federal Communications Commission on Friday criticized President Donald Trump's call for Disney-owned ​ABC (DIS.N), opens new tab and Comcast (CMCSA.O), opens new tab unit NBC to lose their broadcast ‌licenses because they refused to air his speech.

During a nearly half-hour prime-time speech on Thursday, the Republican president revived many of his longstanding claims that U.S. elections are unreliable. In the ​remarks, Trump said networks that did not air his speech ​should have their station licenses revoked.

FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez, ⁠who serves on the commission along with two Republicans, on Friday ​described Trump's call as "ridiculous" because the broadcasters made "the same editorial decisions they've ​made under presidents of both parties." "Those editorial decisions are protected by the First Amendment, and the FCC has no authority to punish a station for refusing ​to air a blatantly political speech," she said in a statement. "This is a naked ​attempt to bully broadcasters, and the FCC should have no part in it."

Revoking ‌a ⁠broadcaster's license requires a multi-step process and a decision by an administrative law judge that could be appealed to the full FCC and the courts.

Read more: https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/fcc-commissioner-says-trump-call-revoke-abc-nbc-licenses-is-unconstitutional-2026-07-17/

[FakeNoose]

1. Of course it is!

[AZJonnie]

2. That Trump would demand punishment of these networks was nearly as predictable as the Sun rising in the East

Cause if there's one thing IQ47 is gonna cry about, above all else, it's people ignoring him.

That's because he's a 6 year old in an 80 year old man's body.

Also, good on Anna Gomez

[wiggs]

3. yes, unconstitutional and reckless. Easy analysis. What should be part of the analysis that MSM is

omitting is the underlying pathology of all the mean-ness, cruelty, incompetence, fear, ignorance, and vengeance. That pathology can be seen every time some outrageous statement or issue arises (nearly every day), yet MSM focuses on individual issue analysis rather than what everyone sees in plain view: the man in the most powerful office in the world is dysfunctional, disordered, infantile, and malicious; he cannot make good decisions.

Let Reuters start there or at least raise the possibility that potus is broken.

[republianmushroom]

4. As if trump cares about what is constitutional and what isn't.

[Bluetus]

5. We need to hear a completely different tone in all the oversight hearings.

Perhaps this is not the best illustration because Brendan Carr may not have broken any CRIMINAL laws -- yet.

But in every hearing, Democrats need to call out the criminal laws that are being broken, and the PRISON penalties.

This is not hard, especially with something as obvious as the insider trading laws or the postal interference laws. With a little work, I bet they could identify CRIMINAL exposure by just about every one of Trump's appointees. And the formula is simple:

Rep: Mr. Postmaster, are you familiar with 18 U.S.C. § 1701?

PM: Not immediately. Can you refresh my memory?

Rep: Certainly, sir. It says obstructing, delaying, or destroying the mail is a felony. Now do you recall it?

PM: Yes.

Rep: Good. And do you the penalty for breaking that law?

PM: Not offhand. I don't see the relevance.

Rep: The penalty can be up to THREE YEARS in prison FOR EACH ACT of obstructing the mail.

PM: We are not obstructing. We're just following the President's EO.

Rep: You don't work for teh President and therefore are not bound -- or protected -- by his EOa. Are you familiar with the statute of limitations for mail tampering?

PM: I believe it is 5 years.

Rep: You are correct, sir. And that means if you tamper with the delivery of mail in November 2026, you can be prosecuted for that felpmy any time through November 2031. Is it really worth prison time obeying an "order" that doesn't even apply to your agency? How many years of prison time are you willing to risk for Donald Trump? How lucky do you feel? Now I won't be the prosecutor in that case, but your testimony here today is srong evidence of mens rea, the awareness of the crime. I strongly suggest you have a good talk with your own personal lawyer before putting yourself in a position that could end very badly for you. Oh, and while you are talking with your lawyer, you might also ask about 52 U.S.C. § 10307.

I yield the balance of my time.

DO THIS WITH EVERY CABINET SECRETARY !!!

[BumRushDaShow]

6. The last oversight hearing in the House held for the FCC (which is covered by Energy & Commerce) was held in January

(video begins at the 5.40 mark and the full thing is about 3.5 hours)

You be the judge on actual "tone".

I used to watch Energy & Commerce hearings before I retired, back when John Dingell and Henry Waxman chaired it since they had jurisdiction over my own agency. The hearings could get rather lively to put it mildly.

[twodogsbarking]

7. Trump is likely aware it is unconstitutional. Don't make me repeat myself.