How have fact-checkers and news outlets evaluated Jimmy Kimmel's claims about Trump's grades?
Executive summary
Jimmy Kimmel has repeatedly mocked or speculated about Donald Trump’s academic records and grades in jokes and monologues going back years, including quips about SATs and college transcripts [1]. News outlets report a back-and-forth in late 2025 in which Trump attacked Kimmel publicly and Kimmel responded by pointing to the president’s low approval ratings and by thanking him for driving attention and high viewership after a suspension — coverage appears in The New York Times, AP, Variety and others [2] [3] [4] [5].
1. How Kimmel has framed the grades story: comedy, speculation and provocation
Jimmy Kimmel’s references to Trump’s grades have largely been delivered as comedy and speculation rather than as formal reporting: for example, Kimmel joked about letters allegedly sent to schools warning them not to release Trump’s grades or SAT scores and quipped that Trump’s grades were so bad “he couldn’t even get into Trump University” [1]. Those moments are presented on late-night television as punchlines tied to larger scandals or testimony rather than as claims supported by newly produced academic records [1].
2. What fact-checkers and news outlets have actually done — and not done
Available sources in this set document outlets reporting the exchange between Kimmel and Trump and quoting Kimmel’s jokes and monologues, but they do not show a specific, sustained fact‑checking project that adjudicates Kimmel’s precise claims about Trump’s grades. Time printed Kimmel’s joke in the context of Cohen testimony and late-night reaction [1]. The New York Times, AP, Variety, Fortune and other outlets have focused on the broader feud, ratings and the suspension-return arc rather than publishing a dedicated article proving or disproving Trump’s school transcripts as mentioned on Kimmel’s show [2] [3] [4] [5] [6].
3. How mainstream outlets covered the Kimmel–Trump clash in 2025
Major outlets framed the interaction as mutual provocation: AP and Fortune described Trump’s social-media calls for ABC to fire Kimmel and the network context for Kimmel’s suspension and return [3] [6]. Variety and Deadline emphasized the commercial impact — Kimmel’s return after suspension drew a record audience (6.3 million viewers reported by Variety, and 6.26 million by Deadline) and Kimmel publicly thanking Trump for the attention [4] [5]. The New York Times noted Kimmel’s comments in a cultural-trend context, citing his prominent Google trending rank and his public jabs [2].
4. The boundary between satire and factual claims
Late-night monologues routinely mix satire with references to newsworthy allegations. Kimmel’s lines about Trump’s school records appear as comedic interpretation of past testimony (Cohen’s claims referenced by Kimmel) and as rhetorical attack, not as an announcement of newly obtained transcripts [1]. Fact-checkers typically treat jokes as rhetoric: outlets included in the search indexed Kimmel’s quips as part of entertainment coverage rather than as claims requiring forensic verification [1] [2].
5. What the sources do not address — limits and open questions
Available sources do not present any newly released academic transcripts or a definitive fact‑checking verdict specifically verifying or refuting the exact grades or SAT scores Kimmel alluded to on air. They do not show a dedicated fact‑check article that examines the underlying documentary evidence for Trump’s school records in response to Kimmel’s jokes (not found in current reporting).
6. Competing perspectives and implicit agendas
Conservative outlets and the president framed Kimmel as an ideological adversary whose suspension and return were evidence of political pressure and media bias, with Trump demanding the comic be removed [3] [6]. Entertainment and mainstream outlets emphasized free‑speech, ratings and Kimmel’s role as a late-night satirist whose attacks are part-performance and part-political commentary; they also reported audience metrics that undercut Trump’s “bad ratings” taunt [4] [5]. Those differing framings reveal competing agendas: political actors positioning Kimmel as disfavored opposition, and media outlets balancing coverage of controversy with business and cultural metrics [3] [4] [6].
7. Bottom line for readers
Jimmy Kimmel’s statements about Trump’s grades are best read as satirical commentary built on past testimony and public controversy, not as new documentary revelations; mainstream reporting around the Kimmel–Trump exchange has focused on the feud and its ratings and reputational consequences rather than on producing or vetting Trump’s academic records [1] [4] [5]. If you seek a factual adjudication of Trump’s grades, current reporting in the supplied sources does not supply that verification (not found in current reporting).