Stephen Colbert is not one to sit quietly when free speech is at stake, and this week he made that clearer than ever as he threw his full support behind fellow late-night host Jimmy Kimmel. On the September 18 episode of The Late Show, Colbert began his monologue with an opening line that set the tone for the night. “Tonight, we are all Jimmy Kimmel,” he declared, before tearing into ABC’s controversial decision to suspend Jimmy Kimmel Live following pressure from the Federal Communications Commission.
Colbert wasted no time in describing the suspension as “blatant censorship.” He argued that bowing to political pressure was not just a mistake but a dangerous precedent. “With an autocrat, you cannot give an inch,” Colbert warned, making clear that he believed this was about far more than a single host or a single joke. His remarks carried the energy of someone who has seen this movie before: attempts by those in power to silence voices that challenge them.
The comedian even managed to fold humor into his outrage, joking about ABC’s naivety. “If ABC thinks this is going to satisfy the regime, they are woefully naive, and clearly, they’ve never read the children’s book If You Give a Mouse a Kimmel.” The line landed with both laughter and applause, a reminder of how late-night television often mixes sharp political critique with comedic flair. Then, turning his focus back to Kimmel directly, Colbert added a more personal note. “And to Jimmy, just let me say, I stand with you and your staff 100%.”
The incident that sparked this storm began when Jimmy Kimmel made pointed comments about the political aftermath of a tragic shooting. Tyler Robinson, a suspect charged with fatally shooting conservative commentator Charlie Kirk, became the subject of intense partisan framing. On his show, Kimmel criticized what he called the “MAGA gang” for “desperately trying to characterize” Robinson as “anything other than one of them” and accused them of exploiting the tragedy for political gain. That was enough to draw the ire of FCC chairman Brendan Carr, who argued that Kimmel’s remarks crossed a line.
Carr, appearing on conservative commentator Benny Johnson’s program, issued what many interpreted as a thinly veiled threat to ABC. “We can do this the easy way or the hard way,” Carr said, in reference to Kimmel’s show. His comments carried weight, especially after Nexstar Media Group, a major broadcaster of ABC affiliates, quickly announced it would stop airing Jimmy Kimmel Live. By the next day, ABC officially suspended Kimmel’s program indefinitely, sparking shockwaves throughout the entertainment world and igniting a debate about free speech in America.
Colbert, whose own show was canceled by CBS earlier this year under murky circumstances, had a unique vantage point from which to comment. He suggested that Kimmel’s suspension wasn’t just about one episode or one comment but part of a broader plan, even pointing back to Donald Trump’s earlier words. In July, when Colbert himself was canceled, Trump had gleefully posted on Truth Social that Kimmel was “NEXT to go.” To Colbert, that wasn’t just gloating—it was foreshadowing. “It is so bizarre to see an American president weighing in so vehemently on TV shows,” Colbert said, shaking his head at the surreal reality.
To further hammer his point home, Colbert resurrected his legendary Colbert Report character, delivering a satirical segment of The Word as his old blowhard, flag-waving persona. “Daddy’s home,” he announced to cheers, slipping back into the exaggerated bravado that made that character iconic. He then told his audience, “I’m going to spank you with freedom until I can see the American flag reflected in your shiny, swollen (expletive),” a line meant to underline the absurdity and seriousness of what he called a “free speech crisis.”
The fallout from ABC’s decision has been swift and heated. Politicians, celebrities, and everyday viewers have been weighing in, many of them outraged by what they see as direct government interference in entertainment. California governor Gavin Newsom summed up the frustration on X, declaring, “There is no such thing as free speech under Donald Trump’s reign.” His words echoed the sentiments of many Democrats who believe the FCC, under Trump-aligned leadership, is overstepping its authority to clamp down on dissenting voices.
In the entertainment industry, solidarity quickly began to form. Comedians, writers, and actors know that today it might be Jimmy Kimmel, but tomorrow it could be any of them. The culture of late-night television, where satire often collides with politics, has always relied on a degree of protection for comedians to speak their minds, even if what they say offends certain viewers. For many, ABC’s move to suspend Kimmel is a chilling signal that the line between political pressure and corporate decision-making has blurred beyond recognition.
The irony is that this situation mirrors what Colbert himself endured just months ago. In July, CBS announced the sudden cancellation of The Late Show, attributing the decision to financial struggles in the late-night landscape. The network insisted it had nothing to do with Colbert’s outspoken criticism of Donald Trump. But critics weren’t convinced. At the time, Paramount, CBS’s parent company, was in the middle of merger talks with Skydance, a deal that reportedly required government approval. Many suspected that the cancellation was less about ratings or costs and more about appeasing political forces.
Colbert’s cancellation prompted an outpouring of support from the entertainment community, and one of his most vocal defenders was none other than Jimmy Kimmel. Speaking to Variety in August, Kimmel dismissed CBS’s claims that Colbert’s show was bleeding money. “I don’t buy it,” he said plainly, making clear that he, too, suspected there were political strings attached. That history of mutual support between Colbert and Kimmel makes the current situation feel like a reversal of roles, with Colbert now standing up for his friend.
The suspension has also reignited broader questions about the boundaries of free speech, the influence of corporations, and the role of government in regulating media. Late-night comedy has long been one of the few platforms where politicians and policies are openly mocked in front of mass audiences. The idea that a comedian could lose his platform because a government official was displeased sets off alarm bells not just for entertainers but for anyone concerned about the health of democracy.
Colbert, whose own comedic persona thrives on poking holes in authoritarian tendencies, has been particularly effective at drawing the connections between small acts of censorship and larger patterns of repression. His comments about ABC being “woefully naive” underscored his belief that once a network caves to one demand, it invites more. The metaphor he used—based on the children’s book If You Give a Mouse a Cookie—wasn’t just a clever punchline. It was a warning about the slippery slope that comes when corporations prioritize political appeasement over creative independence.
Meanwhile, the role of Brendan Carr in this drama has drawn intense scrutiny. As chairman of the FCC, Carr holds significant influence over broadcasters, and his public comments about Kimmel were anything but subtle. When he said networks could comply “the easy way or the hard way,” it sounded less like regulatory oversight and more like an ultimatum. Critics argue that this is precisely the kind of government intimidation that the First Amendment was designed to prevent.
For viewers, the absence of Jimmy Kimmel Live feels jarring. Kimmel has been a staple of late-night television for over two decades, known for blending silly celebrity interviews with biting political commentary. His voice, love it or hate it, has been part of the national conversation, especially during the Trump years. To suddenly pull him off the air sends a powerful message about who gets to speak and who doesn’t.
Colbert’s passionate defense is resonating not only because of his own popularity but because it frames the issue in stark terms. If a comedian can be silenced for criticizing political figures, then free speech isn’t as secure as Americans like to believe. “You know what my community values are, buster?” Colbert said, directly addressing Carr. “Freedom of speech!” That rallying cry, delivered with both humor and fire, reflects the unease many people feel as they watch this unfold.
The situation also highlights the fragile ecosystem of modern television. Networks are facing declining viewership, shifting advertising models, and fierce competition from streaming. Those financial pressures make them more vulnerable to political influence, as executives may calculate that compliance is safer than resistance. Yet, as Colbert suggested, such calculations can backfire, undermining trust in networks and alienating the very audiences they need to survive.
There’s also a personal dimension here. Colbert and Kimmel, along with other late-night hosts like Seth Meyers and John Oliver, form a sort of fraternity of comedians who understand the risks of speaking truth to power. Their careers are built not just on making people laugh but on challenging authority, often in ways that no politician or journalist can. When one of them is targeted, the others feel the shockwaves. That solidarity has been on full display, with Colbert’s fiery monologue circulating widely on social media, where he captioned the clip: “The Late Show stands with Jimmy Kimmel and his staff.”
In moments like this, late-night television becomes more than entertainment—it becomes a battleground for ideas. The laughter and applause in Colbert’s studio weren’t just about jokes; they were about affirmation, a way for audiences to show that they, too, value the freedom to speak, criticize, and satirize.
As the controversy continues, one thing is clear: Jimmy Kimmel’s suspension has struck a nerve. It has become a flashpoint for debates about censorship, government overreach, and corporate responsibility. And in Stephen Colbert, Kimmel has found not just an ally but a defender willing to use his platform to keep the conversation alive.
The story is still unfolding, with no word yet on if or when Kimmel’s show might return. But the uproar surrounding it has already cemented this as one of the most significant cultural clashes of the year. Colbert’s warning, laced with humor and fury, serves as both a defense of his friend and a rallying cry for free expression. For audiences who tune into late-night for more than just celebrity gossip and comedy sketches, this moment is a reminder that the stage can be a place where democracy itself is tested.
And if Colbert’s words are any indication, the comedians aren’t planning to back down. They know that the stakes are higher than a punchline. They are about the very right to tell that punchline in the first place.