Democrats and Hollywood Figures Criticize Jimmy Kimmel’s Suspension Amid Debate on Host’s Role on ABC Evening News

Jimmy Kimmel speaks onstage while hosting the 96th Annual Academy Awards in March 2024. Labor unions, free speech groups and fellow entertainers are rallying around him after ABC suspended his late-night show on Wednesday.

Kevin Winter/Getty Images

hide caption

toggle caption

Kevin Winter/Getty Images

Criticism — and concern about free speech — is pouring in after ABC abruptly suspended Jimmy Kimmel Live! under pressure from the Trump administration.

ABC announced Wednesday that it would take Kimmel’s show off the air indefinitely, after threats from Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Brendan Carr to the stations that carry it. Speaking on a podcast hosted by a conservative commentator, Carr took issue with comments Kimmel had made in Monday’s onscreen monologue about Republicans’ reaction to Charlie Kirk’s killing, which the late-night host had previously condemned.

When asked about Kimmel’s suspension at a press conference Thursday morning, President Trump said Kimmel was “fired because he had bad ratings more than anything else, and he said a horrible thing about a great gentleman known as Charlie Kirk.”

“You can call that free speech or not, he was fired for lack of talent,” Trump said.

Civil rights groups, labor unions, Democratic politicians and Hollywood A-listers have condemned the move as an attack on the First Amendment, not only for Kimmel and his writers but for Americans as a whole.

“Trump officials are repeatedly abusing their power to stop ideas they don’t like, deciding who can speak, write, and even joke,” Christopher Anders, director of the ACLU’s Democracy and Technology Division, said in a statement. “The Trump administration’s actions, paired with ABC’s capitulation, represent a grave threat to our First Amendment freedoms.”

Earlier Wednesday, before ABC’s announcement, Nexstar — which operates 32 of the country’s ABC stations and is currently seeking FCC approval for a $6.2 billion merger — said it was pulling Jimmy Kimmel Live!. Another TV station operator, Sinclair Broadcast Group, quickly followed suit.

The suspension is being cheered by Republicans, including Trump and Carr himself. But the government’s perceived involvement — and the network’s compliance — is facing widespread condemnation by left-leaning politicians and entertainers, as well as several nonpartisan groups.

“We cannot be a country where late night talk show hosts serve at the pleasure of the president,” said free speech group the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE). “But until institutions grow a backbone and learn to resist government pressure, that is the country we are.”

NPR reached out to Jimmy Kimmel and his show but did not hear back by the time of publication.

Democrats — including Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and California Gov. Gavin Newsom — are also saying that Trump’s and Carr’s words contradict their past statements in favor of free speech and against government censorship. When Trump began his second term in January, for instance, he signed an executive order establishing policies to prevent government interference in constitutionally protected speech.

But some critics of the administration say they are seeing the opposite.

The Trump administration has withheld funding from universities it says aren’t doing enough to fight antisemitism amid pro-Palestinian protests, and sued media outlets, including this week, the New York Times. Attorney General Pam Bondi drew criticism for saying this week that the Justice Department would go after “hate speech” in the wake of Kirk’s killing, later clarifying it would only go after speech that leads to violence.

ABC’s decision to suspend Kimmel comes two months after the July announcement that CBS’ The Late Show with Stephen Colbert will end next year. The network cited financial reasons, but the timing fueled speculation that its parent company’s then-pending merger and Colbert’s recent criticisms of Trump contributed to its cancellation.

“After years of complaining about cancel culture, the current administration has taken it to a new and dangerous level by routinely threatening regulatory action against media companies unless they muzzle or fire reporters and commentators it doesn’t like,” former president Barack Obama said in a statement Thursday, calling on media companies to “start standing up rather than capitulating to it.”

When asked for comment, the White House referred NPR to Trump’s press conference and Carr’s tweets praising the cancellation.

“Local broadcasters have an obligation to serve the public interest,” Carr wrote in one, before singling out ABC’s parent company. “While this may be an unprecedented decision, it is important for broadcasters to push back on Disney programming that they determine falls short of community values.”

Sinclair applauded Carr’s remarks in a statement, saying suspending Kimmel’s show is not enough. It urged him to apologize to Kirk’s family and donate to his family and nonprofit.

Sinclair Vice Chairman Jason Smith called Kimmel’s remarks “inappropriate and deeply insensitive at a critical moment for our country,” and said broadcasters have a responsibility to elevate respectful dialogue in their communities. Sinclair stations will air a tribute to Kirk on Friday.

Smith said “this incident highlights the critical need for the FCC to take immediate regulatory action to address control held over local broadcasters by the big national networks.

Camera crews and onlookers gather in front of the Jimmy Kimmel Live studio on Hollywood Blvd. in Los Angeles on Wednesday.

Chris Pizzello/Invision

hide caption

toggle caption

Chris Pizzello/Invision

What Democrats are saying

Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., ranking member of the House Oversight committee, announced on Thursday morning that he will launch an investigation into the Trump administration, ABC and Sinclair “amid ongoing efforts to censor opposition to the President of the United States.”

“Every American has a duty to stand up for our First Amendment values,” Garcia said in a statement shared with NPR. “We will not be silent as our freedoms are threatened by corrupt schemes and threats. Anyone who is complicit will need to answer to us.”

House Democratic leaders called on Carr to resign on Thursday, in a joint statement that accused him of engaging in “the corrupt abuse of power … by bullying ABC, the employer of Jimmy Kimmel, and forcing the company to bend the knee to the Trump administration.”

NPR has reached out to the FCC for comment but did not hear back by publication time.

The House Democrats, while accusing Trump and Republicans of waging a “war on the First Amendment,” also said media companies “have a lot to explain.”

“The censoring of artists and cancellation of shows is an act of cowardice. It may also be part of a corrupt pay-to-play scheme,” they wrote. “House Democrats will make sure the American people learn the truth, even if that requires the relentless unleashing of congressional subpoena power. This will not be forgotten.”

Many other high-profile Democrats have criticized the Trump administration, accusing it of censorship, including Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin, Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, and Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J.

In a video, Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., lamented “the systematic destruction of free speech in this country” — citing Colbert and Kimmel as examples — and urged Americans to mobilize in what he called a “red-alert moment.”

“This is a moment for all of us to be out on the streets protesting, because if you don’t raise your voices right now about the assault on free speech, about Donald Trump’s decision to disgustingly exploit the murder of Charlie Kirk so as to try to permanently render powerless and impotent those who politically oppose him, there may be no democracy to save a year from now,” Murphy said.

What the industry is saying

Multiple labor unions representing Hollywood writers, actors and musicians were quick to condemn Kimmel’s suspension and assert their support for freedom of expression.

The Writers Guild of America (WGA) — which represents Kimmel’s writers — issued a statement opposing “anyone who uses their power and influence to silence the voices of writers, or anyone who speaks in dissent,” noting that the Constitution protects “the freeing agreement to disagree.”

“Shame on those in government who forget this founding truth,” the union added. “As for our employers, our words have made you rich. Silencing us impoverishes the whole world.”

SAG-AFTRA, which represents performers and media professionals — including NPR journalists — called the decision “the type of suppression and retaliation that endangers everyone’s freedoms.” And the American Federation of Musicians of the United States and Canada accused the Trump administration of “state censorship.”

“It’s now happening in the United States of America, not some far-off country. It’s happening right here and right now,” said union president Tino Gagliardi.

Many celebrities also took up Kimmel’s cause and expressed their dismay at his silencing, from actors like Jean Smart and Ben Stiller to fellow comedians including Kathy Griffin, Mike Birbiglia and Alex Edelman.

Wanda Sykes posted an Instagram video on Wednesday night in which she said she had a full face of makeup on because she had been scheduled to appear on Kimmel’s abruptly-cancelled show.

“So let’s see. He didn’t end the Ukraine war or solve Gaza within his first week, but he did end freedom of speech within his first year,” Sykes said of Trump. “For those of you who pray, now’s the time to do it. Love you, Jimmy.”

It’s not just outspoken Democrats who are concerned.

Former Fox News host Gretchen Carlson, a registered Independent, called on Americans to wake up, writing in a tweet that “If you think ABC capitulating to Trump to suspend Jimmy Kimmel’s show is no big deal … just wait for what could be next.”

Brit Hume, Fox News’ chief political analyst, weighed in on X, writing that the First Amendment does not protect performers like Kimmel from being canceled by their private-sector employers.

“But I would have liked the outcome a lot better if the chairman of the FCC had not involved himself in it,” he wrote.

How might this suspension impact the willingness of other late-night hosts to engage in political satire?

The Outcry Over Kimmel’s Suspension: A Free Speech Flashpoint

The recent suspension of Jimmy Kimmel from ABC has ignited a firestorm of controversy, drawing sharp criticism from prominent Democrats and figures within the Hollywood entertainment industry. The debate centers around the perceived overreach of network discipline and its potential implications for free speech and late-night television. The suspension, details of which remain somewhat opaque, has sparked discussions about the boundaries of comedic expression and the responsibilities of hosts on major news platforms. Many are framing the situation as an attack on comedic freedom and a worrying precedent for network control.

Key Reactions from Political and Entertainment Leaders

The backlash has been swift and vocal. Several high-profile individuals have publicly condemned ABC’s decision.

* Ben Stiller was among the first to voice his disapproval,labeling the suspension a “wild overreaction.”

* California Governor Gavin Newsom has also weighed in, expressing concern over the implications for political satire and the broader media landscape.

* MSNBC host Chris Hayes added his voice to the chorus of dissent, highlighting the importance of protecting journalistic independence, even within the realm of entertainment.

These reactions underscore the important level of concern within Democratic circles regarding the incident. The suspension is being interpreted by many as a potential attempt to stifle critical commentary and limit the scope of political humor on mainstream television.

Understanding the Context: Kimmel’s Role and ABC’s Position

Jimmy Kimmel’s Jimmy Kimmel Live! has long been a platform for political commentary, often featuring pointed critiques of current events and political figures. His show frequently engages in satirical news and has become a significant voice in the late-night talk show circuit. ABC, as a major broadcast network, faces a complex balancing act between allowing creative freedom and maintaining its own brand image and adhering to broadcasting standards.

The specific reasons for the suspension haven’t been fully disclosed, fueling speculation.Some reports suggest the issue stemmed from content deemed insensitive or potentially damaging to the network’s reputation. However,critics argue that the response was disproportionate and sets a dangerous precedent for self-censorship. The debate also touches upon the evolving role of celebrity hosts in delivering news and shaping public opinion.

The Broader Implications for Late-Night Television

This incident extends beyond a single suspension; it raises essential questions about the future of late-night comedy and its place in the media ecosystem.

* Impact on Creative Control: Will networks become more hesitant to allow hosts to tackle controversial topics?

* Chilling Effect on Satire: Could this lead to a decline in bold, provocative humor?

* The Future of political Commentary: Will hosts self-censor to avoid similar repercussions?

The suspension has prompted a wider conversation about the responsibilities of entertainment media in a polarized political climate. It also highlights the increasing scrutiny faced by public figures who use their platforms to express political views.

Historical Precedents: Network Discipline and Host Controversies

Instances of network discipline involving late-night hosts are not unprecedented. Throughout television history, hosts have faced consequences for controversial remarks or segments. However, the current situation is unique due to the intensity of the backlash and the widespread perception that it represents an attack on freedom of expression.

consider these past examples:

1. Joan Rivers & David Letterman (1986): Rivers’ departure from Late Night wiht David Letterman involved disputes over creative control and her burgeoning solo career.
2. Sinbad (1994): Sinbad was briefly suspended from his show after an on-air outburst.
3. Craig Kilborn (2004): Kilborn’s show was cancelled amid concerns about its increasingly cynical tone.

These cases, while different in specifics, demonstrate the ongoing tension between network expectations and the creative freedom of hosts.

The Role of Social Media in Amplifying the debate

Social media platforms have played a crucial role in amplifying the debate surrounding Kimmel’s suspension. The hashtag #FreeJimmyKimmel quickly gained traction, becoming a rallying point for supporters and critics alike. This rapid dissemination of facts and opinion has intensified the pressure on ABC to provide a more transparent explanation for its actions. The incident also underscores the power of social media activism in shaping public discourse and holding institutions accountable. The speed at which news and opinions spread online has fundamentally altered the dynamics of media criticism and public relations.

Keywords for SEO Optimization:

* Jimmy Kimmel

* ABC Suspension

* Free Speech

* late-Night Television

* Political Satire

* Hollywood Criticism

* Democratic Party

* Gavin Newsom

* Ben Stiller

* Chris Hayes

* Comedic Freedom

* Political Commentary

* Satirical News

* Celebrity Hosts

* Entertainment Media

* Political views

* Journalistic Independence

* network Discipline

* Late-Night Comedy

* Social Media Activism

* Media Criticism

*