Disney’s ABC announced Wednesday that it will “pre-empt” Jimmy Kimmel Live! indefinitely after host Jimmy Kimmel used a monologue to criticize how some on the right were responding to the fatal shooting of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. The decision followed a cascade of backlash from broadcasters, a warning from the Federal Communications Commission chair, and a vow by large ABC affiliates to stop airing the show — moves that together pushed Disney to take the series off its schedule for the foreseeable future.

The moment that set everything off

On the episode in question, Kimmel addressed the killing of Charlie Kirk, which authorities say occurred at an event last week and for which a suspect has been charged. Rather than focusing only on condemning the violence, Kimmel used the bit to accuse some conservatives of trying to “score political points” from the tragedy — arguing that the shooter was being reframed in partisan terms by right-wing figures. In his monologue Kimmel said, in effect, that “we hit some new lows … with the MAGA gang trying to characterize this kid who killed Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them,” a line that became the focal point of the backlash.

Kimmel’s comments were broadly framed as a critique of the political reactionary discourse rather than the shooting itself; critics, however, characterized his words as insensitive and inflammatory coming so soon after a politically charged killing.

How networks and regulators reacted

The firestorm moved fast. Nexstar Media Group, one of the largest owners of local ABC affiliates in the U.S., publicly announced it would preempt Jimmy Kimmel Live! in its markets, saying it “strongly objects to recent comments made by Mr. Kimmel concerning the killing of Charlie Kirk” and that it would replace the show with alternative programming. That pledge from Nexstar triggered a domino effect among other affiliates and put ABC/Disney between the pressure from local station partners and the regulatory spotlight.

At the federal level, FCC Chair Brendan Carr publicly criticized Kimmel’s remarks and warned broadcasters that content deemed to be outside the public interest could draw regulatory scrutiny — an explicit signal that political pressure had moved into the regulatory sphere. The FCC’s chair’s comments were widely cited as another reason affiliates felt compelled to act quickly.

Within hours, ABC (owned by The Walt Disney Company) issued a terse but consequential statement: “Jimmy Kimmel Live! will be pre-empted indefinitely,” and Disney executives were reported to have called Kimmel’s comments “offensive and insensitive at a critical time in our national political discourse.” Those corporate words, combined with affiliate decisions and the FCC noise, amounted to the formal shelving of the long-running late-night franchise on ABC’s schedule.

What the companies actually said (the wording matters)

• Nexstar: “strongly objects to recent comments made by Mr. Kimmel concerning the killing of Charlie Kirk and will replace the show with other programming in its ABC-affiliated markets.”

• ABC/Disney (spokesperson): “Jimmy Kimmel Live! will be pre-empted indefinitely.” Reporting has also attributed language to a Disney executive calling Kimmel’s remarks “offensive and insensitive.”

• FCC Chair Brendan Carr: publicly warned ABC about potential action over the broadcast content and described the remarks as deeply concerning to the agency.

What Kimmel actually said (on-air)

Kimmel’s monologue included sharp criticism of how some conservative voices were portraying the suspect and the political implications of the killing. He argued that certain actors on the right were “trying to characterize this kid who killed Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them,” and accused those figures of using the tragedy to score political advantage rather than confronting the violence. That framing — suggesting a political motive in how conservatives discussed the suspect — is the passage that drew the most outrage.

Context: the case that precipitated the exchange

Charlie Kirk was shot at a public event; law enforcement arrested a suspect and prosecutors have moved aggressively, with reports that Utah prosecutors intend to seek the death penalty. The killing has reverberated through conservative media and political circles, and responses to both the crime and the suspect’s motives quickly became politicized — the cultural lightning rod into which Kimmel’s monologue landed. That charged background explains why a late-night comedian’s commentary triggered such swift institutional responses.

Why Disney likely pulled the plug

A few threads came together to make Disney’s choice a near-inevitability:

1. Affiliate pressure — Large station groups preempting the show undercut distribution and advertising revenue, and threatened fractured markets where ABC’s slot would carry different programming in different regions. Nexstar’s public move was especially damaging because of its scale.

2. Regulatory risk — The FCC chair’s public warning raised the specter of scrutiny that could impact broadcast licenses or invite fines; networks are sensitive to perceived regulatory exposure.

3. Corporate reputation and advertiser risk — Disney must weigh advertiser responses, corporate relationships, and the broader public perception; executives reportedly called the comments offensive and insensitive, signaling they saw the brand risk as high enough to act.

Taken together, those forces created immediate commercial and operational incentives for Disney/ABC to preempt the show rather than wait for the controversy to play out.

What this means for late night and media politics

The episode highlights the fragile truce between outspoken hosts and corporate/broadcaster constraints. Late-night has long been a space for political satire and partisan jabs, but networks — especially those with large corporate parents and affiliate ecosystems — face a narrower margin for controversy when a story is simultaneously a live political controversy and a potential regulatory flashpoint.

For Kimmel personally, the suspension is a major reputational and professional blow; for Disney and ABC, it’s a reminder that the swim lanes between creative freedom, affiliate obligations, regulatory pressure, and advertiser comfort are volatile and can intersect fast.

What to watch next

• Will ABC or Disney reinstate the show after a cooling-off period, or is this the first step toward a longer separation? Reports emphasize the action is “indefinite,” but networks sometimes reopen suspended properties after negotiations or internal review.

• Will the FCC follow through with any formal inquiry or action beyond public warnings? That would be a major escalation with implications for future broadcast content.

• How will advertisers and other affiliates respond — and will other networks or platforms weigh in? The business ripple effects will influence how quickly this resolves.