Amicus Briefs to SCOTUS Focus on Broadcast Industry, Judicial Deference
Amicus briefs Monday supporting the FCC’s Supreme Court appeal of the 3rd U.S. Court of Appeals' Prometheus IV decision focused on the impact to the broadcast industry, judicial deference and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (see 2011170057). Amici…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
supporting the 3rd Circuit are due Dec. 23, a week after the date for the brief from the public interest group winners from Prometheus. “Local media ownership rules must reflect the realities of the modern media marketplace,” filed network affiliate groups for Fox, CBS, ABC and NBC: “Television broadcasters cannot maintain healthy, economically viable businesses in that hyper-competitive marketplace if a single panel of the Third Circuit is allowed to continue to unfairly hamstring local journalism.” Gray Television said the 3rd Circuit’s ruling “harms small and midsized communities around the nation by depriving them of the benefits of the FCC’s modernized rules.” The court “stymied the Commission’s efforts to modernize its media ownership rules as directed by Congress,” said The Phoenix Center. “Regardless of where this Court may draw the precise line between overly deferential and unduly strict judicial review of agency actions, the Third Circuit’s decision in this case was inappropriate.” The ruling runs afoul of the First and Fifth amendments, said the Southeastern Legal Foundation. “Give the public interest standard its appropriate, narrower meaning.” TechFreedom said SCOTUS should reverse the court because the ruling hurts the system of courts deferring to agencies. When courts don’t defer to valid agency interpretations of the law, “the resulting regulatory gridlock strengthens the arguments of those judges, scholars, and experts who favor allowing less delegation by Congress and less deference to agencies,” TechFreedom said. The Americans for Prosperity Foundation argued the 3rd Circuit overreached by not following the statute, but also that FCC calls for deference are “misguided.” AFPF cited the pending FCC action on Section 230 as an example of the agency’s “problematic” interaction with judicial deference. “While the proper interpretation of Section 230 is beyond the scope of this case, AFPF wishes to alert this Court to potential collision course the FCC may be on with the U.S. Constitution and separation of powers.”