FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc. (2009)
2009 United States Supreme Court case / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about Federal Communications Commission v. Fox Television Stations (2009)?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
SHOW ALL QUESTIONS
Federal Communications Commission v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556 U.S. 502 (2009), is a decision by the United States Supreme Court that upheld regulations of the Federal Communications Commission that ban "fleeting expletives" on television broadcasts, finding they were not arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act.[1] The constitutional issue, however, was not resolved and was remanded to the Second Circuit and re-appealed to the Supreme Court for a decision in June 2012.[2]
Quick Facts FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., Argued November 4, 2008 Decided April 28, 2009 ...
FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc. | |
---|---|
Argued November 4, 2008 Decided April 28, 2009 | |
Full case name | Federal Communications Commission, Petitioner v. Fox Television Stations, Respondent |
Docket no. | 07-582 |
Citations | 556 U.S. 502 (more) 129 S. Ct. 1800; 173 L. Ed. 2d 738; 2009 U.S. LEXIS 3297 |
Case history | |
Prior | Fox Television Stations, Inc. v. FCC, 489 F.3d 444 (2d Cir. 2007); cert. granted, 552 U.S. 1255 (2008). |
Subsequent | On remand, 613 F.3d 317 (2nd Cir. 2010); cert. granted, 564 U.S. 1036 (2011); vacated and remanded, FCC v. Fox TV Stations, Inc., 567 U.S. 239 (2012). |
Holding | |
The Federal Communications Commission had not acted arbitrarily when it changed a long-standing policy and implemented a new ban on even "fleeting expletives" from the airwaves. The Court explicitly declined to decide whether the new rule is constitutional, and sent that issue back to the lower courts for their review. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinions | |
Majority | Scalia, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito; Kennedy (all but Part III–E) |
Concurrence | Thomas |
Concurrence | Kennedy (in part) |
Dissent | Stevens |
Dissent | Ginsburg |
Dissent | Breyer, joined by Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg |
Laws applied | |
Administrative Procedure Act |
Close