Appeals court orders FCC to respond to challenge over 'news distortion' policy
A bipartisan group of former Federal Communications Commission chairs, commissioners and the Radio Television Digital News Association petitioned a federal appeals court to force the FCC to act on a long-pending request to rescind its decades-old 'news distortion' policy after Chair Brendan Carr repeatedly invoked it against broadcasters; the court gave the FCC thirty days to respond.123
- Country
- United States (RSF 2026 rank: 64th of 180)
- Where
- United States
- Level of government
- National
- Tactic
- Funding and ownership pressure
- Stage
- Pressure (see the ladder)
- Head of government at the time
- Donald Trump
- Issue of the day
- Under Chair Brendan Carr, the FCC had used its news distortion policy to open or reopen inquiries into CBS, NBC and ABC's election-season coverage, prompting the petitioners to argue the unresolved policy itself had become a tool of pressure on broadcasters.
- Outcome
- Ongoing, April 28, 2026. A federal appeals court ordered the FCC to respond to the mandamus petition within thirty days; the underlying policy remained unresolved.
- Era
- The 2020s
What happened
In November 2025, a bipartisan coalition of former FCC chairs and commissioners, senior former staff and the Radio Television Digital News Association filed a petition asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to order the FCC to rule on a long-pending request to rescind the agency's news distortion policy, which the petitioners argued Chair Brendan Carr had used to pressure broadcasters over their election coverage without the FCC ever taking a formal vote on the underlying rule. On April 28, 2026, the three-judge panel ordered the FCC to respond to the mandamus petition within thirty days. Former FCC Chairman Mark Fowler said press freedom would remain at risk until the policy was repealed, and Protect Democracy's Conor Gaffney said Carr's refusal to bring the petition to a commission vote was itself a threat to the First Amendment. Carr responded to the news of the court order on social media with, "How about no."123
What reason was given
The FCC did not offer a substantive defense of retaining the news distortion policy in the source reviewed; Chair Carr's public response was dismissive rather than explanatory.1
What changed for reporting
A policy that broadcasters said the FCC's own chair had used as leverage over election coverage remained unresolved for months even as a federal court intervened to compel the agency to act on whether to keep or rescind it.2
Timeline
2026
Who acted
| Name | Role in this incident | Office at the time |
|---|---|---|
| Brendan Carr | other | Chair, Federal Communications Commission |
| Federal Communications Commission | other | Independent federal regulatory agency |
Sources
Claims cited
- Former FCC Chairman Mark Fowler said press freedom would remain unresolved until the policy was repealed.
Until it is repealed, we will not have a free press.
Court Gives FCC 30 Days To Answer Challenge Over News Distortion Policy, Inside Radio, 2026-04-28. Claim 392, checked 2026-09-22. - Protect Democracy's Conor Gaffney said Carr's refusal to bring the petition to a vote was itself a threat to the First Amendment.
FCC Chair Brendan Carr's refusal to present the petition to the Commission for a vote is not only a procedural failure, but also an active threat to the First Amendment.
Court Gives FCC 30 Days To Answer Challenge Over News Distortion Policy, Inside Radio, 2026-04-28. Claim 393, checked 2026-09-22. - Carr responded to the court's involvement dismissively on social media.
How about no.
Court Gives FCC 30 Days To Answer Challenge Over News Distortion Policy, Inside Radio, 2026-04-28. Claim 394, checked 2026-09-22.