Blake McFalls — March 17, 2026
Donald Trump has had trouble justifying his war in Iran to the American people. Latest polling puts the net approval rating of military action in Iran at -14 points, extremely low for the start of a conflict. As gas prices rise and the U.S. becomes entrenched in the war for the long term, Trump wants to quell dissent. On Sunday, Chair of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Brendan Carr threatened to clamp down on media outlets critical of Trump’s war, a move supported by Trump himself.
The U.S. government has a history of intervening with the press during wartime. During World War One, President Woodrow Wilson created the Committee on Public Information (CPI), the government’s propaganda machine. More critically, Congress passed the Espionage Act of 1917 and the Sedition Act of 1918, both of which suppressed speech and news coverage that opposed America’s intervention in the War. On its face, Congress’s behavior infringes on First Amendment rights to free speech and the press. However, Supreme Court Chief Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes ruled in the case Schenck v. United States that the government could stop speech and press that posed a “clear and present danger” to American national security.
The establishment of the clear and present danger test emboldened future wartime governments to further intervene in the press’ affairs. In fact, World War Two marked the entry of the FCC into wartime press regulation. In 1941, NBC and CBS, which were known as chain networks, controlled large portions of the radio network industry to the extent that the FCC considered them to be monopolies. The FCC requested NBC to divest from its network, which would become ABC, in order to safeguard the reliable dissemination of information during the war. While NBC claimed that this was a First Amendment right issue, the Supreme Court once again ruled in favor of the government, arguing there was a public interest in doing so. The Court’s ruling in National Broadcasting Co. v. United States (1943) forever changed the FCC, because it gave the FCC authority to revoke broadcasting licenses whenever there is a public interest or the clear and present danger test is met.
The FCC has vowed to revoke the licenses of broadcasters: in Carr’s words, “Broadcasters that are running hoaxes and news distortions — also known as the fake news — have a chance now to correct course before their license renewals come up.”
Carr directly quoted the Court’s decision in Red Lion Broadcasting Co., Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, a 1969 case adjudicated based on the Court’s ruling in 1943, to defend his statements.
The Court sided with the government’s actions during both WWI and WWII; however, the FCC’s actions in 2026 are not nearly as well-warranted. While press that implored Americans to dodge the draft in WWI could have inhibited the U.S. war effort, most judicial decisions agree that press that simply criticizes the decision to enter war does not directly pose a threat to U.S. national security. Because of this, Democrats such as Senator Elizabeth Warren and California Governor Gavin Newsom have condemned the FCC’s actions on constitutional grounds.
Fears of authoritarianism by the FCC are not overblown, as Carr continues to use his power to politicize the press across the U.S. The FCC’s efforts only appear to intensify as Trump’s political outlook worsens. Carr has previously attracted controversy over his alleged threats to ABC after Jimmy Kimmel aired critical comments about the president.
Read more here:
