Legal Intelligence

ABC Sues FCC, Seeks Injunction on Eight Broadcast License Reviews

The lawsuit tests whether federal broadcast regulators can initiate license reviews against a network whose parent company is engaged in separate legal disputes with the administration.

The Congressional Times · August 18, 2026

Disney's ABC filed a lawsuit against the Federal Communications Commission in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Tuesday, August 18, 2026, according to reporting by the New York Post. The complaint seeks a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction that would halt the FCC's active review of eight Disney-held broadcast licenses, including ABC-affiliated stations in New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago. The filing also requests a hearing before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.

The complaint, as described in court filings cited by the New York Post, alleges that the FCC's license review process constitutes a retaliatory action tied to the content and editorial direction of ABC's programming. The specific legal theories underlying the claim, including any First Amendment or Administrative Procedure Act arguments, would be detailed in the full complaint, which is a public record available through the federal PACER court filing system under the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

The FCC has statutory authority under 47 U.S.C. Section 309 to review and renew broadcast licenses held by television stations. License reviews are a standard regulatory function, though the timing and selection of stations subject to heightened scrutiny are decisions made at the commission's discretion. The FCC had not issued a public statement responding to the lawsuit as of the time of this report, according to available public records.

This filing follows a pattern of legal conflict between major media organizations and federal regulators that has played out across multiple courts in 2025 and 2026. The outcome of ABC's request for a temporary restraining order will depend on whether the court finds the network has demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits and risk of irreparable harm, the standard threshold for preliminary injunctive relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65.

Several material facts remain unknown at this time. The full text of the complaint, including the specific counts filed, has not been independently reviewed by this publication. It is also unknown whether the FCC has formally responded to the court or filed a motion to dismiss. The complete complaint is available as a public record through PACER, and any FCC response would be filed in the same docket. The court's ruling on the temporary restraining order request would also be a public record upon issuance.

We Follow the Data, Not the Narrative

The Congressional Times exists because public records are public — and the analysis built from them should not be exclusive to those who can afford $60,000-a-year intelligence subscriptions.

Every story published in The Congressional Times is sourced to a verifiable public record: a court filing, a Senate lobbying disclosure, an FEC contribution record, a USASpending contract, or a verified news report. We state our sources inline. We show our math. When we are wrong, we say so publicly.

We do not editorialize in news coverage. We do not use loaded language. Both political parties are held to identical standards.

The Follow the Money investigations are the heart of this publication. Each begins with Gab-E Political Intelligence running against 10+ million government records before a single word of editorial is written.

How We Source, Verify, and Correct Our Work

Every factual claim in a Congressional Times story is checked against a primary source: a government filing, a court record, a direct quote, before publication. When a claim can't be verified or doesn't hold up as originally reported, we drop it or reframe it. We do not publish disputed claims as settled fact.

When we get it wrong: we correct the story directly, note the correction and date at the bottom of the piece, and update the record. We do not quietly edit and move on.

Bylines: stories with a named byline are written and fact-checked by that person. Stories without a byline are sourced from Gab-E Political Intelligence, our automated research platform, and are labeled as such.

Ownership: The Congressional Times is published by Gab-E Holdings LLC. Gab-E, our intelligence platform, powers our sourcing and research pipeline.

Corrections or concerns: support@gab-e.com