Supporters saw the criticism as understandable.
They argued that comedians can criticize Donald Trump without turning references to death or family tragedy into the centerpiece of a joke.
Critics, meanwhile, questioned whether public figures should be able to determine where comedy ends simply because they find a particular joke offensive.
That disagreement is at the heart of the controversy.Kimmel’s Defense
Kimmel has spent years making political humor a major part of his late-night persona.
His approach frequently combines political commentary with sarcasm, exaggeration, and personal jokes about prominent politicians.
Supporters say that is precisely what political satire is supposed to do.
They argue that comedy has historically served as a way to challenge people in positions of power, particularly when conventional political criticism becomes repetitive.
But critics respond that freedom to make a joke does not automatically make every joke effective or appropriate.
Something can be legally protected and still be criticized as tasteless.
