Remember that brazenly biased presidential debate on Sept. 10, hosted by ABC television? The one where ABC moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis “fact-checked” former President Donald Trump five times and Vice President Kamala Harris, not at all?  The one advertised as a legitimate debate that felt more like a 90-minute campaign commercial for Harris?

The Center for American Rights has filed complaints with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the Federal Elections Commission (FEC), asking these agencies to hold ABC and its local affiliate accountable on two matters: an alleged campaign donation violation, and a concern about its television broadcast license.  

Unlike print media, broadcast airwaves belong to the public. While anyone can find some paper, start their own newsletter, and say whatever they want, there is a finite number of airwaves across the broadcast spectrum, so they belong to everyone. That is why the FCC licenses segments of the airwaves to broadcasters with the condition that they must use a certain amount of their broadcast time to serve the public.

“One of the obligations of stewarding the airwaves in the public interest is that debates must be fair and impartial, and when you fail at that, there must be accountability from the regulator,” Daniel Suhr, attorney at the Center for America Rights, told The Federalist in a phone interview. “The media have been pushing the boundaries for decades and what ABC did was further than what anyone had done previously.”

Public Reprimand

The Center for American Rights filed a complaint with the FCC, naming WPVI-TV Philadelphia, which produced the debate in conjunction with ABC. WPVI holds the broadcast license.

The complaint notes that the public has a right to be “honestly informed” and the FCC has promised to “investigate when presented with ‘evidence of a broadcaster’s intent to advance a particular candidacy,’” the complaint to the FCC reads. “Over and over again, the [FCC] has warned against debate programming and format decisions that ‘serv[e] the political interest of one of the candidates.’”

The moderators’ “obvious bias comes from the questions they did not ask, the topics they did not raise,” the complaint said. There were no questions about abruptly swapping the Democratic candidate from President Joe Biden to Harris, or about Biden’s apparent cognitive decline, or about why Biden is still the sitting president if he is not fit to run for office.   

The attempted assassination of Trump was also ignored. Harris was not asked about the effectiveness of the Secret Service, who was responsible, or what security measures should be taken to prevent future threats.

The Center for American Rights tells the FCC the debate failed the “public interest standard” for broadcasters which prohibits “news distortion … and news suppression.”

The complaint asks for a public reprimand of WPVI “for carrying programming contrary to its public interest obligations.”  

Neither WPVI nor ABC responded to a request for comment for this report.

“Media have been pushing the boundaries for decades and what ABC did was further than what anyone had done previously,” Suhr said. He noticed a similar problem in the recent vice-presidential debate. “The vice-presidential debate is just further evidence we need to enforce the rules. It goes against the core of what a debate should be and what the law provides.”

The FCC has informed WPVI of the complaint, Suhr said. The television station has 30-60 days to respond. It will not be resolved before the election. 

In-Kind Donation

The complaint directed at the Federal Election Commission notes that while the FEC allows broadcasters to stage candidate debates, this was not a true debate. That makes it a 90-minute prime-time television in-kind campaign contribution, Suhr said. That is, a service given to a candidate instead of money. It is a problem because it is illegal for a corporation to make a contribution or expenditure in connection with any presidential election.

“ABC News did not provide fair and impartial treatment of candidates; in doing so, they misled rather than informed voters,” the FEC complaint reads. It points to the critical fact-checking of Trump, live on the air, and the allowance of untrue statements by Harris to pass without notice. For example, Harris said “There is not one member of the United States military who is in active duty in a combat zone in any war zone around the world, [for] the first time this century.” This was a shock to deployed military troops who were watching from around the world.

Harris also criticized Project 2025, written by the Heritage Foundation, as something Trump supports. Her campaign ads continue to present this fabrication. “Trump has repeatedly said he wasn’t involved in its writing, does not believe in its policies, and won’t implement it,” the complaint notes.

“If Donald Trump were to be reelected, he will sign a national abortion ban,” Harris lied without interruption. Trump has repeatedly said he opposes a national abortion ban and supports leaving the issue to the states.

If ABC had charged advertising rates for what seemed like a 90-minute infomercial for Harris, it would be valued at tens of millions of dollars. That could be considered an undocumented, illegal donation, and could result in fines for ABC.    

The FEC and FCC will investigate these complaints and issue decisions, Suhr said.

For more election news and updates, visit electionbriefing.com.