Rand Paul: FCC chair had "no business" intervening in ABC/Kimmel controversy

The FCC exists (in part) to enforce a certain morality on public broadcasters. Whatever we think about that today, that was a core responsibility of the FCC when it started and that still exists today.

> The FCC is barred by law from trying to prevent the broadcast of any point of view. The Communications Act prohibits the FCC from censoring broadcast material, in most cases, and from making any regulation that would interfere with freedom of speech. Expressions of views that do not involve a “clear and present danger of serious, substantive evil” come under the protection of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of speech and freedom of the press and prevents suppression of these expressions by the FCC. According to an FCC opinion on this subject, “the public interest is best served by permitting free expression of views.” This principle ensures that the most diverse and opposing opinions will be expressed, even though some may be highly offensive.

Source: https://www.fcc.gov/sites/default/files/the_fcc_and_freedom_...

"Last Reviewed: 12/30/19" (Trump's first term)

Highly cherry-picked. The next paragraph says that FCC limits broadcast of indecent and profane material.

As I said, the FCC is allowed to enforce a certain morality. It seems clear that the morality being enforced would fall in line with the ruling power of the day.

Obscenity, indecency, and profanity are narrowly defined by the FCC:

https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/obscene-indecent-and-pr...

Kimmel's performance was clearly not obscene or indecent - it did not depict or describe sexual conduct or excretory organs - and it aired after 10 PM, so whether it was profane is irrelevant.

bad reading comprehension. here is what I said:

>As I said, the FCC is allowed to enforce a certain morality. It seems clear that the morality being enforced would fall in line with the ruling power of the day.

And what you said was incorrect. Under 1A, the only content which the FCC can ban outright is obscenity, defined as per the document I linked; see FCC v. Pacifica for context.