Byron Allen Lawsuit: McDonald’s, Comcast, Charter, and Nielsen

Byron Allen’s lawsuits target three of the largest corporations he has done business with, plus the ratings firm that measures his networks. His $10 billion racial discrimination case against McDonald’s settled on June 13, 2025, weeks before trial.¹ A $20 billion suit against Comcast produced a unanimous 2020 Supreme Court decision that reshaped federal civil rights law before settling. A $10 billion suit against Charter Communications ended in a confidential 2021 settlement. A fraud suit against Nielsen remains active.

The $10 Billion McDonald’s Discrimination Suit

In May 2021, Allen Media Group’s Entertainment Studios Networks and Weather Group units sued McDonald’s Corporation in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, seeking $10 billion for racial discrimination in advertising contracts.²

The complaint accused McDonald’s of running a two-tiered advertising system: a large “general market” budget and a much smaller “African American tier” with less favorable pricing. Allen alleged that despite his networks having general audience appeal, McDonald’s confined them to the smaller tier because he is Black, creating “separate and unequal tracks” for Black-owned media companies.² The suit claimed that while Black consumers accounted for roughly 40% of the chain’s U.S. sales, McDonald’s directed less than $5 million of its $1.6 billion annual TV advertising budget to Black-owned media.³

Judge Fernando M. Olguin dismissed the initial complaint on November 30, 2021, finding the facts insufficient, but allowed Allen to refile.⁴ After three amended complaints, the judge denied McDonald’s next motion to dismiss in January 2022, ruling that Allen’s lawyers had “alleged sufficient facts to support an inference of intentional discrimination.” McDonald’s argued the dispute was “about revenue, not race.”³

With a jury trial set for July 15, 2025, the parties settled on June 13, 2025. Financial terms were not disclosed.¹ McDonald’s committed to continuing to buy advertising from Allen’s networks at “market value” and made no admission of wrongdoing.⁵ Allen said “our differences are behind us,” and McDonald’s said Allen had agreed to “refocus his energies on a mutually beneficial commercial arrangement.”

The Separate California State Suit Against McDonald’s

Allen ran a parallel $100 million case in California state court on a different theory. In 2021, McDonald’s had publicly pledged to raise its national advertising spending with Black-owned media from 2% to 5% by the end of 2024.⁶ Allen’s companies alleged McDonald’s reneged, saying they submitted a $30 million advertising proposal after the pledge and received only $2.1 million.⁷

In February 2024, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Mel Red Recana granted McDonald’s motion to strike the complaint under California’s anti-SLAPP statute. The pledge ran through 2024, and the suit had been filed in May 2023 with more than 18 months still on the clock; it was “purely speculative,” Recana wrote, to conclude McDonald’s would not follow through.⁸ In March 2025, the California Court of Appeal unanimously affirmed, holding the pledge was “not an actionable promise” because it set a general corporate goal without specifying how funds would be split among individual media companies.⁷ The June 2025 settlement resolved this case along with the federal one.⁶

The $20 Billion Comcast Suit and the Supreme Court Ruling

Allen’s litigation strategy began years earlier. In February 2015, Entertainment Studios Networks filed a $20 billion racial discrimination suit against Comcast, alleging the cable operator refused to carry several of his channels because of his race.⁹ Comcast said it declined the channels for legitimate business reasons, particularly low ratings.¹⁰

The case, brought under Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, reached the Supreme Court. The Ninth Circuit had held that Allen needed to show race played only “some role” in Comcast’s refusal. In a unanimous decision by Justice Neil Gorsuch on March 23, 2020, the Court rejected that standard. It held that Section 1981 requires a plaintiff to prove race was the “but-for” cause of the defendant’s conduct, meaning the discrimination would not have occurred absent the plaintiff’s race.¹¹¹²

The ruling reached well beyond Allen’s case. Civil rights groups warned it set a high bar for Section 1981 plaintiffs, given that defendants typically hold exclusive access to evidence about their own motives. The Court did not decide whether Allen’s specific allegations met the new standard and sent the case back to the lower courts. Before it could be relitigated, Comcast and Allen settled in June 2020, with Comcast agreeing to carry three of Allen’s channels: Comedy.TV, Recipe.TV, and JusticeCentral.TV. Financial terms were not disclosed.⁹

The $10 Billion Charter Communications Suit

Allen filed a parallel $10 billion racial discrimination suit against Charter Communications, alleging it blocked Black-owned companies’ access to its cable system. The complaint included allegations that a former Charter senior vice president refused to meet with Allen’s company and used racially insensitive language, and that Charter’s CEO once referred to Allen as “boy.” In November 2018, the Ninth Circuit allowed the case to proceed, finding Allen’s allegations about Charter’s treatment of his company compared with white-owned companies “sufficient to state a viable claim.”¹³

The case ended in February 2021 through an undisclosed settlement filed before Judge George H. Wu. Unlike the Comcast deal, the one-sentence joint announcement disclosed no channel carriage agreements or other specific terms.¹⁴

The Nielsen Fraud Suit

Allen Media Group’s active litigation is against the ratings firm Nielsen, alleging “fraudulent misrepresentation and fraud by concealment.” The complaint claims Nielsen’s panel-based measurement system was unreliable for Allen’s networks because of their limited distribution, and that Nielsen concealed this unreliability while charging Allen’s companies millions in fees. Allen Media Group is seeking billions in damages.¹⁵ This case sits outside the advertising discrimination line that defined the McDonald’s, Comcast, and Charter suits, and unlike those three it has not produced a public settlement or ruling on the merits.

1
Variety. Byron Allen, McDonald’s Reach Settlement in $10 Billion Lawsuit Over TV Ads
2
PR Newswire. Byron Allen’s Allen Media Group Files $10 Billion Lawsuit Against McDonald’s Corporation for Racial Discrimination
3
Fox 13 Seattle. Byron Allen McDonald’s Discrimination Lawsuit Can Move Forward, Judge Rules
4
Restaurant Business Online. Byron Allen’s Lawsuit Against McDonald’s Dismissed
5
The Hollywood Reporter. Byron Allen, McDonald’s Settlement in Discrimination Lawsuit
6
USA Today. McDonald’s, Byron Allen Lawsuit Settlement
7
MetNews. False Promise — Weather Group LLC v. McDonald’s USA LLC
8
Deadline. Byron Allen McDonald’s Lawsuit Dismissed Under Anti-SLAPP Statute
9
The Philadelphia Inquirer. Comcast, Byron Allen Settlement — Weather Channel Agreement
10
The Washington Informer. Supreme Court Sides With Comcast Against Byron Allen in $20B Discrimination Suit
11
Supreme Court of the United States. Comcast Corp. v. National Association of African American-Owned Media
12
SCOTUSblog. Comcast Corp. v. National Association of African American-Owned Media
13
Stamford Advocate. Charter Communications Racial Discrimination Lawsuit
14
Next TV. Charter, Byron Allen Resolve $10 Billion Discrimination Lawsuit
15
Allen Media. Byron Allen’s Allen Media Group Sues Nielsen for Fraud in Ratings