President Donald Trump made fresh threats on July 17 to revoke broadcast licenses after both ABC and NBC opted not to carry his primetime speech about the 2020 election live. First Amendment advocates immediately labeled the threat as lacking any legal foundation, describing it as the most recent chapter in years of hostile rhetoric aimed at media outlets whose reporting the president opposes.
The decision by the two networks proved controversial because Trump used the roughly 25-minute address to renew claims that conspirators, China and the media collaborated to steal the 2020 election from him—assertions that have been repeatedly debunked. The newly declassified material he cited during his remarks did not substantiate his allegations.
While ABC and NBC chose to maintain their regular evening lineups rather than interrupt programming, both offered the speech on their digital streaming services. CBS broke ranks and aired the address, though anchor Tony Dokoupil prefaced the broadcast by noting that “much of” the president’s commentary on the subject “has been false.” The network cut away before the speech concluded, ending transmission with approximately five minutes left.
Trump Targets the Networks From the Podium
The president attacked the networks that declined to carry his speech during the address itself. “In a rare move, NBC and ABC, fake news, have both said that they would not cover this speech,” he said. He escalated further, asserting that fraud “should mean a revocation of their licenses,” and protesting that the networks use public airwaves he estimated were worth multibillions “for absolutely no money.”
His reference appeared to be to broadcast licenses issued by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which authorize use of public spectrum. But the threat confronted an immediate structural problem: neither ABC nor NBC holds such licenses. The networks produce content, but transmission happens through local affiliate stations that own the FCC permits. Those affiliates operate as separate corporate entities, not network subsidiaries. The president has repeated the same factual error throughout both his first administration and his second, which began January 20, 2025, issuing comparable warnings over unfavorable journalism.
No Legal Power to Compel Coverage
According to Greg Lukianoff, who leads the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression as president and CEO, networks have refused to air presidential addresses live before, and he described threatening licenses over editorial decisions as an assault on free speech guarantees.
A Familiar Move by Presidents of Both Parties
Major broadcast outlets have declined to broadcast presidential speeches in the past. When President Joe Biden delivered a Philadelphia address in September 2022 attacking Donald Trump and what he termed MAGA extremism, ABC, NBC and CBS all refused to carry it live, deeming the content partisan messaging ahead of midterm elections rather than standard presidential communication.
Likewise, when President Barack Obama unveiled new immigration policies in November 2014, the major broadcast networks passed on his speech, judging it overly political. Neither Biden nor Obama responded by threatening broadcast license revocation.
In reality, audiences who wished to watch the speech faced no shortage of options. It streamed in full on cable news channels, YouTube, social media, the White House website and the networks’ own streaming platforms.
Thus far, the threat has not moved beyond words. No formal proceedings against ABC, NBC or their affiliates have been initiated, and the FCC’s licensing power does not include sanctioning networks for editorial judgments about which presidential addresses deserve airtime. Yet the incident reflects a consistent dynamic throughout the president’s dealings with journalists: when media coverage does not align with his preferences, he publicly demands retribution—even when the law provides no such mechanism.
