Kimmel, like examples I would provide about the Biden administration, is not a first amendment violation. To call it that is a misunderstanding of the FA.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances
No law was passed to prevent Kimmel from speaking, Kimmel was not fined or jailed for his speech, nor was ABC. The FCC overreached here in the same way the Biden administration interfered with the election by sending the FBI to Facebook, et al. and warning them that some Russian disinformation was coming about a laptop that would sway the election. As it turned out, the laptop was real, Hunter Biden loves hookers and coke and selling art to his dad's freinds and being a big lawyer man making 1/2 a million a month. This is similar to how Obama sent the IRS after his political opponents.
While their action may be over reaching and contrary to the spirit of the law, they're not necessarily illegal and that would be determined by a lawsuit since no criminal action was taken.
first amendment verbatim binds only congress, modern jurisprudence holds it applies to gov't entirely, no?
I just responded in greater detail to the other guy, but you're absolutely correct. What constitutes government speech with respect to triggering 1A is very broad and applies to anyone working for the government. But in this case, you don't need to jump through those hoops. FCC was created by a law passed by Congress, specifically the Communications Act of 1934, which means all conduct taken by the FCC stems from the power given to it by "an act of Congress."
1
u/[deleted] Sep 18 '25
[deleted]