Chevron precedent falls. What does it mean for the FCC?

[Theater of My Mind]

The Supreme Court has just overturned the historic Chevron precedent that gave federal agencies the power to interpret statutes when laws aren’t clear, effectively reining in their power. What kind of impact will this likely have on the FCC and its power over broadcasters?

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4745680-supreme-court-chevron-case

 

[TheBigA]

We've already seen similar challenges to the FCC's interpretation of the indecency rules. Stations have challenged the commission's interpretation of the rules, and the obscenity rules were kicked back for a rewrite because they were too vague. There were also challenges to the FCC's ownership rules.

https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-300915A1.pdf

We now hold that the FCC’s policy violates the First Amendment because it is unconstitutionally vague, creating a chilling effect that goes far beyond the fleeting expletives at issue here.

 

[TheBigA]

Here's an article that addresses the question:

SCOTUS Curbs Powers Of FCC And Other Agencies, Makes Challenges Easier.

Challenges to decisions by the FCC on everything from broadcast ownership limits to net neutrality will have more force based on a Supreme Court ruling Friday. In a 6-3 decision

www.insideradio.com

 

[TheBigA]

Former FCC commissioners are critical of the Chevron decision:

FCC’s Brendan Carr: ‘We’re Heading The Wrong Way On Media Regulation.’

Commissioner Brendan Carr says he doesn’t agree with everything that is going on right now in terms of the Federal Communication Commission’s tech and telecom policy, saying most of his

www.insideradio.com

 

[Mark Roberts]

It depends on whether an operator based in the region covered by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decides to challenge something or another. I doubt that one of the big chains would do that: large corporations appreciate stability and a regulatory agency focused mainly on paperwork compliance certainly provides that.

 

[Kelly A]

It depends on whether an operator based in the region covered by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decides to challenge something or another. I doubt that one of the big chains would do that: large corporations appreciate stability and a regulatory agency focused mainly on paperwork compliance certainly provides that.

Speaking of broadcasting as an industry, it's likely safe to assume that radio and TV would support deregulating obscenity rules and ownership caps. Both put broadcasting at a competitive disadvantage. The reality is; that doing away with such regulations will cost a lot in the form of legal and lobbyists. Nobody has that sort of free cash to throw around anymore.