Politics makes for some weird roommates. Honestly, if you had told me a year ago that Senator Ted Cruz would be the one standing up for Disney and Jimmy Kimmel against a Republican FCC Chairman, I probably would’ve laughed. But here we are in early 2026, and the fallout from the "Kimmel vs. Carr" saga is still shaking up DC.
It started with a monologue. You probably remember it—Kimmel said some pretty inflammatory stuff regarding the assassination of Charlie Kirk. The blowback was instant. Within hours, FCC Chairman Brendan Carr didn't just wag a finger; he basically dropped a nuclear bomb on the broadcast industry. He went on The Benny Show and told Disney and its affiliates, "We can do this the easy way or the hard way."
That didn't sit right with Ted Cruz.
The Goodfellas Comparison
During an episode of his podcast, Verdict, Cruz didn't hold back. He’s usually the guy leading the charge against "woke" Disney. He’s been mocked by Kimmel more times than he can count. He actually said he was "thrilled" that Kimmel’s show went dark for a bit. But—and this is a big "but"—he absolutely loathed the way it happened.
Cruz compared Carr’s rhetoric to an organized crime boss. "That’s right out of Goodfellas," Cruz said. "That’s right out of a mafioso coming into a bar going, 'Nice bar you have here. It would be a shame if something happened to it.'"
✨ Don't miss: Is Pope Leo Homophobic? What Most People Get Wrong
Think about that for a second. The Chair of the Senate Commerce Committee—the guy who literally oversees the FCC—calling the FCC Chairman a mobster. That’s not just a spicy quote; it’s a massive internal rift in the Republican party over the very nature of free speech and government power.
Why Cruz is Worried About the Precedent
Cruz’s logic is actually pretty straightforward, even if it feels like he’s defending his enemies. He’s looking at the long game. Basically, he’s terrified that if a Republican FCC can pull a license because they don't like what a late-night host says, then a Democrat FCC will do the exact same thing to conservative media the second they get back into power.
He called Carr’s move "dangerous as hell."
Broadcasters like ABC, CBS, and NBC operate on "public interest" licenses. It’s a vague term. Carr argued that airing "news distortion" or "reprehensible" content violates that public interest. Cruz, a former constitutional lawyer, sees that as a slippery slope that ends with the government becoming the ultimate editor-in-chief of the airwaves.
🔗 Read more: How to Reach Donald Trump: What Most People Get Wrong
- The "Easy Way": Disney caves, fires the host, and keeps their license.
- The "Hard Way": The FCC launches a "character and candor" investigation that could tie up a billion-dollar broadcast license for years.
The Impact on Local Broadcasters
It wasn't just Disney in the crosshairs. Carr specifically called on local affiliates—the ones not owned by Disney but that carry the show—to "push back" and preempt the content.
Nexstar, the biggest owner of local stations in the country, actually did it. They pulled the show. But you have to look at the context: Nexstar was (and still is) trying to get some massive mergers through the FCC. When the guy who has to sign off on your multi-billion dollar deal tells you to "do the right thing," you usually do it.
This is exactly what has Cruz and others like Senator Rand Paul spooked. It looks less like "serving the public interest" and more like regulatory extortion.
Is the First Amendment Still a Thing?
Carr’s defense is pretty simple: "No one has a First Amendment right to a license." He’s technically quoting the Supreme Court there. Broadcasters get to use the public's airwaves for free, so they have to follow rules that Netflix or X (formerly Twitter) don't.
💡 You might also like: How Old Is Celeste Rivas? The Truth Behind the Tragic Timeline
But there's a difference between "don't broadcast obscenity" and "don't say mean things about political figures."
Ted Cruz’s stance is that if Kimmel lied or slandered someone, the remedy is a defamation lawsuit in civil court. Let the lawyers fight it out. Don't bring the hammer of the federal government down to crush a business just because its employees are being jerks.
What’s Happening Now?
As we move through 2026, the Senate Commerce Committee is looking at "modernizing" the Communications Act. Cruz has hinted that the "public interest" standard might be a relic of the past that needs to be tightened—or tossed out entirely—to prevent it from being used as a political weapon.
If you're a broadcaster or just someone who cares about what you can see on TV, this fight isn't over. It’s a fundamental clash between "protecting the public" and "protecting the First Amendment."
Actionable Insights for the Future:
- Watch the License Renewals: Keep an eye on the FCC’s "Delete, Delete, Delete" docket. It’s supposed to be about deregulation, but how it treats "public interest" will tell you everything you need to know about the future of TV.
- Affiliate Independence: Expect more local stations to demand "opt-out" clauses in their contracts with national networks to avoid getting caught in the crossfire of federal feuds.
- The Courts Will Decide: This is headed for the Supreme Court. Whether a broadcast license can be revoked for "news distortion" is a legal question that will define media for the next fifty years.
Ted Cruz and Brendan Carr might be on the same side of the aisle, but they are miles apart on how the government should handle the media. And honestly? That's a debate we probably needed to have a long time ago.