Chasing the Runaway Carr

On Monday evening, Stern and his organization made their move. In a letter to the Office of Disciplinary Counsel at the D.C. Court of Appeals, first obtained by Status, the Freedom of the Press Foundation asked the body to investigate—and potentially disbar—Carr. The group argued that, as a lawyer and member of the D.C. Bar, Carr is “bound by the D.C. Rules of Professional Conduct and must uphold the principles of competence, integrity, impartiality, and respect for the Constitution.” Instead, they wrote, he has “engaged in egregious misconduct,” misrepresenting the FCC’s authority and abusing the agency’s powers to punish media outlets that Trump dislikes.

The complaint laid out a pattern of behavior that extends beyond the Paramount-Skydance deal. Carr, it noted, has launched “legally frivolous investigations into disfavored media outlets,” threatened regulatory retaliation over companies’ D.E.I. programs, and ominously suggested that editorial decisions at major networks might result in “consequences,” among other things. In wielding his power in such a way, the foundation contended, Carr has used his position to advance Trump’s political agenda rather than act as an independent regulator.

“Carr’s actions brazenly violate legal and ethical standards that govern the practice of law and public officials, undermining the First Amendment, the FCC’s credibility and the laws he is trusted to administer,” the letter said. “His abuse of his office to force an unwarranted settlement of a private lawsuit, is shameful and warrants disbarment. But his repeated interference with constitutional rights, misrepresentations of FCC authority, blatant partisanship and selective enforcement and failure to comply with federal ethics rules demonstrate a lack of competence, integrity and professionalism, even putting Paramount aside.”

“We respectfully urge the Office of Disciplinary Counsel to investigate these actions and take appropriate disciplinary measures, up to and including disbaring Carr,” the letter concluded.

Of course, Carr’s approach has already drawn bipartisan condemnation. Earlier this year, five former FCC commissioners—including Republicans Alfred C. Sikes and Rachelle Chong—warned that Carr’s actions set a chilling precedent by signaling that broadcasters’ content could affect their regulatory standing. In an interview with Status earlier this month, current Democratic commissioner Anna Gomez similarly described the agency under Carr as “an instrument of censorship and political retaliation,” adding that some broadcasters are already softening coverage out of fear.

In a way, what makes the Monday filing notable is not just the substance of the complaint, but the role reversal it represents. Carr has relished trolling media outlets critical of the administration—regularly responding to our inquiries with GIFs and lashing out at former FCC officials who questioned his tactics—while launching a flurry of probes into various media companies. Now, Stern and the Freedom of the Press Foundation are effectively turning the tables, asking for Carr himself to be investigated under the very professional standards he has long flouted.

Carr did not respond to a request for comment Monday evening and it goes without saying that it’s unlikely the complaint will change his status at the FCC. But for a bar disciplinary body to even open a formal inquiry into a sitting FCC chair would mark an extraordinary rebuke—and underscore just how far Carr has taken the agency into uncharted territory.

Ultimately, the complaint is as much about seeking accountability as it is about drawing a red line: if Carr can use the powers of his office to intimidate newsrooms and tilt coverage toward Trump, then, Stern argued, lawyers in public office can act as political enforcers with impunity. And, if that is the case, it would set a dangerous precedent moving forward.

Rush to Depose Rupert: Donald Trump’s legal team is wasting no time going on the offensive. Mere days after the president sued The Wall Street Journal over its report that he once sent Jeffrey Epstein a lewd birthday card, Trump’s lawyers asked a court to let them depose Rupert Murdoch within 15 days. Their stated rationale: Murdoch is 94 and has “suffered recent significant health scares.” Whether that explanation is actually genuine—or simply a tactic to rattle Murdoch and put him on the defensive—is anyone’s guess. But the move underscores Trump's tendency to make the fight awfully personal.

Rogan’s Epstein Revolt: Say it ain’t, so Joe! That’s what Donald Trump is likely thinking today after the internet’s biggest podcaster and noted Trump supporter Joe Rogan ripped into the president for “gaslighting” his supporters over Jeffrey Epstein, declaring: “This one’s a line in the sand.” Rogan's frustration reflects the simmering fury among Trump's MAGA Media base, which once backed him unconditionally but is now in open rebellion after his sudden reversal on the Epstein conspiracies that his own administration helped fuel. On his show, Rogan also slammed FBI Director Kash Patel over his promise to publicly disclose the full video from Epstein’s prison cell before he died, but upon release by the DOJ this month was curiously missing a few minutes of footage. “That film has a fucking minute missing from it,” he said. “Like, do you think we’re babies? What is this?” Rogan’s reaction signals the backlash is still raging even after Trump’s desperate attempts to distract his base with outlandish claims about President Obama, Beyoncé and Oprah.

WBD's New Name: Warner Bros. Discovery on Monday revealed the names it will use after spinning off its flagging linear TV networks. The studio-focused company, which will be helmed by David Zaslav, will revert to the iconic Warner Bros. name. The new linear-television business, run by Gunnar Wiedenfels, will be branded Discovery Global.

► 👀 In making the announcement, WBD also revealed the leadership teams for both entities. Conspicuously absent from either leadership roster: David Leavy. The longtime WBD executive left CNN earlier this year for what was billed as a broader corporate role, though, as we noted at the time, it was odd no clear position was announced. His omission now suggests Leavy could be on his way out entirely, as we suggested could happen back in May. We’ll see.