Comcast v. National Association of African-American-Owned Media

Last updated
Comcast Corp. v. National Association of African American-Owned Media
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued November 13, 2019
Decided March 23, 2020
Full case nameComcast Corporation v. National Association of African American-Owned Media, et al.
Docket no. 18-1171
Citations589 U.S. ___ ( more )
140 S. Ct. 1009; 206 L. Ed. 2d 356
Argument Oral argument
Case history
PriorMotion to dismiss granted, Nat'l Ass'n of African-American Owned Media v. Comcast Corp., No. 2:15-cv-01239, 2016 WL 11652073 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 5, 2016); reversed, 743 Fed. Appx. 106 (9th Cir. 2018).
Holding
A §1981 plaintiff bears the burden of showing that the plaintiff's race was a but-for cause of its injury, and that burden remains constant over the life of the lawsuit.
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
Clarence Thomas  · Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Stephen Breyer  · Samuel Alito
Sonia Sotomayor  · Elena Kagan
Neil Gorsuch  · Brett Kavanaugh
Case opinions
MajorityGorsuch, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Breyer, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, Kavanaugh; Ginsburg (except for the footnote)
ConcurrenceGinsburg (in part and in the judgment)
Laws applied
42 U.S.C.   § 1981

Comcast v. National Association of African-American-Owned Media, 589 U.S. ___ (2020), is a United States Supreme Court case related to protections against racial discrimination in the Civil Rights Act of 1866. The case relates to whether cable television operator Comcast engaged in racial discrimination in refusing to carry channels from Entertainment Studios, a minority-owned network founded by Byron Allen. In a unanimous opinion in March 2020, the Court ruled that under the Civil Rights Act, Allen was burdened to show that race was but-for the sole reason Comcast failed to enter into a contract with his network. [1] The parties reached a settlement after the Court's decision.

Contents

Background

Byron Allen founded Entertainment Studios in 1993 originally to produce syndicated television shows, but eventually grew to include a number of lifestyle channels. Since as recent as 2014, Allen started negotiations with Comcast to have the cable provider run Entertainment Studio's lifestyle channels, but they could not agree to contract terms. Allen filed a lawsuit (filed under both Allen's National Association of African-American-Owned Media and Entertainment Studios) in the United States District Court for the Central District of California against Comcast in February 2015, seeking US$20 billion in damages and citing that Comcast had used racial discrimination to deny him a contract, in violation of section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866. [2] Allen alleged that Comcast was discriminating against 100%-minority owned networks like Entertainment Studios, as only US$3 million of the total US$11 billion carriage fees Comcast paid were to 100%-minority owned networks. Comcast refuted the accusations, stating they had been in negotiations with Allen in good faith for several years to strike a deal. [3] Comcast claimed that the lawsuit was "an ordinary business grievance masquerading as a racial discrimination claim". [4]

Around the time of this filing, Comcast was in the midst of trying to acquire Time Warner, and Time Warner had been named in Allen's suit, [3] but by April 2015, Comcast called off its acquisition. Allen also named several other groups including the NAACP, the National Urban League, the National Action Network, Al Sharpton and Meredith Attwell Baker, arguing that they had supported Comcast's earlier 2011 merger with NBCUniversal through a memorandum of understanding (MOU), in which Allen claimed was to "whitewash Comcast’s discriminatory business practices". [5]

In the Comcast case, Judge Terry Hatter at the District Court had dismissed the case without prejudice in August 2015, stating that Allen had "failed to allege a plausible claim for relief", [6] but later allowed Allen to refile an amended complaint. [7] Allen's revised complain left only Comcast and Time-Warner as the defendants, but still asserted racial discrimination related to the MOU that had been signed earlier. [4] By May 2016, Hatter had again dismissed Allen's suit for the lack of claim of relief, but allowed Allen to file a second amended claim. [8]

Simultaneous cases

Allen had launched a similar lawsuit in December 2014 against AT&T, which owned DirecTV, but this was settled out of court by the end of 2015, with AT&T agreeing to pick up Allen's channels. [9] Allen also filed a US$10 billion lawsuit against Charter Communications in January 2016, also in the Central District Court of California. [10] The Charter case was approved of by Judge George H. Wu, finding that Allen had provided sufficient claims for potential discrimination. [11] [12]

Ninth Circuit appeal

Allen had appealed the ruling in the Comcast case to the Ninth Circuit, while Charter had done the same for its case. In November 2018, the Ninth Circuit overturned the Comcast case dismissal and rejected the Charter's request to dismiss, stating that, in the case of the Charter decision, "Plaintiffs' allegations regarding Charter's treatment of Entertainment Studios, and its differing treatment of white-owned companies, are sufficient to state a viable claim." [13] [14] The Ninth Circuit rejected arguments made by Comcast and Charter that they had "editorial discretion" to select channels for their cable line-ups under the First Amendment. [15]

Supreme Court

Comcast petitioned the Supreme Court of the United States for writ of certiorari to challenge the Ninth Circuit's decision, which the Court granted in June 2019. [16] (Charter separately filed its own petition to the Supreme Court in March 2019, [17] which as of November 2019 remains at the petition stage, and thus not joined with the Comcast case.) [18]

Oral arguments for the case were heard on November 13, 2019. [19] The arguments focused on which of two tests to use to determine the merits of Allen's case that had been considered in the case's prior legal history. The first was whether there was evidence that race was a "motivating factor" in Comcast's decision to deny entering a contract with Allen, which had been used by the Ninth Circuit. This took into account the language of the Comcast/NBCUniversal MOU that Allen claimed established Comcast's motivation. The other "but-for" test was suggested by Comcast, in that if there was no race issue involved, that Comcast would still not have entered a deal with Allen. [20]

The Court released its opinion on March 23, 2020. [1] In a unanimous decision vacating the decision of the Ninth Circuit and remanding the case to be reheard, the Court sided with Comcast's "but-for" test, in that Allen had to have shown that race was the sole deciding factor for the case, rather than the possibility that it may have only been a motivating factor. The decision was based on prior rulings from University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar . [21] Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the majority opinion joined by all but Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who wrote a concurrence in part that concurred in the judgement. [22] Ginsburg specifically wrote to counter Comcast's claims that such discrimination can only be only evaluated at the finalization of contract, as such discrimination could occur at any time during contract negotiations, such as when a bank requests letters of reference for a potential lender. Ginsburg also wrote, as a footnote, of having stated her past concern that "a strict but-for causation standard is ill suited to discrimination cases and inconsistent with tort principles" but recognized it was an established principle from past Supreme Court cases. [23]

Impact

Civil rights organizations and leaders have condemned Comcast for its behavior in the case. In the weeks leading to the oral arguments at the Supreme Court, Representative Bobby Rush argued that Comcast should be broken up, stating "Comcast has enjoyed the largesse – as has the cable industry, in general – of the African-American and other minority communities and has reached such prominence that it now disregard[ sic ] these communities with a cold, callous corporate insensitivity that is stultifying, arrogant, harmful, and intensely painful." [24]

Ian Millhiser of Vox said of the Supreme Court decision that it represented a change in the liberal justices' stance of the court to approach discrimination cases through a mixed motive discrimination, as previously set out in Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins , which gave plaintiffs seeking discrimination a greater benefit of the doubt than the "but-for" ruling from Comcast. Millhiser referred to the cases of Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc. and University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar [21] as cases since Price Waterhouse that went against the mixed motive allowance. Millhiser suggested that the liberal side of the court may have given in to the conservative majority in Comcast to establish that the liberal side of the court was respecting the principle of stare decisis from previous court decisions such that the conservative side should also uphold stare decisis in other pending decisions. [25]

In June 2020, Allen and Comcast reached a settlement to end the lawsuit, with Comcast agreeing to carry three of the channels in Allen's lineup in addition to the Weather Channel which Allen had acquired in the interim, in addition to other terms. [26]

In Allen's concurrent action against Charter Communications in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Judge George H. Wu ruled in August 2020 that Allen's suit could proceed based on evidence Allen had provided that met the requirements by the Supreme Court in the Comcast ruling. [27]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Voting Rights Act of 1965</span> US federal legislation that prohibits racial discrimination in voting

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 is a landmark piece of federal legislation in the United States that prohibits racial discrimination in voting. It was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson during the height of the civil rights movement on August 6, 1965, and Congress later amended the Act five times to expand its protections. Designed to enforce the voting rights guaranteed by the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, the Act sought to secure the right to vote for racial minorities throughout the country, especially in the South. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the Act is considered to be the most effective piece of federal civil rights legislation ever enacted in the country. It is also "one of the most far-reaching pieces of civil rights legislation in U.S. history."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Comcast</span> American multinational telecommunications conglomerate

Comcast Corporation, incorporated and headquartered in Philadelphia, is the largest American multinational telecommunications and media conglomerate. The corporation is the second-largest broadcasting and cable television company in the world by revenue, and is also the largest pay-TV company, the largest cable TV company, and largest home Internet service provider in the United States. Comcast is additionally the nation's third-largest home telephone service provider. It provides services to U.S. residential and commercial customers in 40 states and the District of Columbia. As the owner of the international media company NBCUniversal since 2011, Comcast is also a high-volume producer of feature films for theatrical exhibition, and over-the-air and cable television programming.

United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc., 334 U.S. 131 (1948), was a landmark United States Supreme Court antitrust case that decided the fate of film studios owning their own theatres and holding exclusivity rights on which theatres would show their movies. It would also change the way Hollywood movies were produced, distributed, and exhibited. It also opened the door for more foreign and independent films to be shown in U.S. theaters. The Supreme Court affirmed the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York's ruling that the existing distribution scheme was in violation of United States antitrust law, which prohibits certain exclusive dealing arrangements. The decision created the Paramount Decree, a standard held by the United States Department of Justice that prevented film production companies from owning exhibition companies. The case is important both in American antitrust law and film history. In the former, it remains a landmark decision in vertical integration cases; in the latter, it is responsible for putting an end to the old Hollywood studio system.

Charter Communications, Inc., is an American telecommunications and mass media company with services branded as Spectrum. With over 32 million customers in 41 states, it is the second-largest cable operator in the United States by subscribers, just behind Comcast, and the third-largest pay TV operator behind Comcast and AT&T. Charter is the fifth-largest telephone provider based on number of residential lines.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Stan Lee Media</span>

Stan Lee Media (SLM) was an Internet-based creation, production and marketing company that was founded in 1998, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in 2000, and ultimately dismissed from bankruptcy in November 2006. In its early years, the company created Stan Lee branded super hero franchises for applications in all media. Its 165-man animation production studio was based in Los Angeles from 1998 to 2001. It won the 2000 Web Award for the best Entertainment Portal on the World Wide Web, but the company failed in the same year and the corporate shell has been involved in numerous lawsuits in the years since. The company has been characterized as "a sleazy Internet start-up that could function as the poster child for the excesses of the turn-of-the-century era." Stan Lee himself cut ties with the company long before his death.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">National Press Photographers Association</span>

The National Press Photographers Association (NPPA) is an American professional association made up of still photographers, television videographers, editors, and students in the journalism field. Founded in 1946, the organization is based in at the Grady College of Journalism and Mass Communication at the University of Georgia. The NPPA places emphasis on photojournalism, or journalism that presents a story through the use of photographs or moving pictures. The NPPA holds annual competitions as well as several quarterly contests, seminars, and workshops designed to stimulate personal growth in its members. It utilizes a mentor program which offers its members the opportunity to establish a relationship with a veteran NPPA member and learn from them. The organization also offers a critique service, a job bank, an online discussion board, and various member benefits.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nicollette Sheridan</span> English-born American actress

Nicollette Sheridan is an English-born American actress. She began her career as a fashion model before landing a role in the short-lived ABC primetime soap opera Paper Dolls in 1984, as well as starring in the romantic comedy film The Sure Thing (1985). She rose to prominence as Paige Matheson on the CBS primetime soap opera Knots Landing (1986–1993), for which she received two Soap Opera Digest Awards. Thereafter, Sheridan appeared in lead roles in numerous television films and miniseries, including Lucky Chances (1990), Virus (1995), and The People Next Door (1996). She also appeared in the feature films Noises Off (1992), Spy Hard (1996), Beverly Hills Ninja (1997), and Code Name: The Cleaner (2007).

Entertainment Studios Networks is a group of seven high-definition cable networks operated by Entertainment Studios Inc., a company owned by and featuring comedian Byron Allen.

Entertainment Studios, Inc., also known as Allen Media Group, is an American media and entertainment company based in Los Angeles. Owned and founded in 1993 by businessman Byron Allen, the company was initially involved in the production and distribution of first-run television series for U.S. television syndication. Under the Entertainment Studios Networks division, it also operates a group of digital cable and satellite channels, which broadcast a mix of original programs and the company's syndicated content.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Graphic Artists Guild</span>

The Graphic Artists Guild is a guild of graphic designers, illustrators, and photographers and is organized into seven chapters around the United States. It is a member of the international organization Icograda.

<i>Hoang v. Amazon.com, Inc.</i>

Hoang v. Amazon.com, Inc. et al. is a lawsuit brought by actress Junie Hoang in October 2011 against IMDb.com and its parent company Amazon.com for revealing her true date of birth, which she said opened her up to age discrimination. In March 2013, all of her claims against Amazon and all but one of her claims against IMDb were dismissed, and in April 2013, a jury found that IMDb was not liable for the remaining claim for breach of contract; the verdict was upheld on appeal.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms</span> Canadian legal advocacy organization

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) is a Canadian legal advocacy organization specializing in a social conservative approach to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The libertarian organisation has partnered with several right-wing backers in the United States and pursues legal cases of a social conservative nature.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Copyright Remedy Clarification Act</span> United States copyright law

The Copyright Remedy Clarification Act (CRCA) is a United States copyright law that attempted to abrogate sovereign immunity of states for copyright infringement. The CRCA amended 17 USC 511(a):

In general. Any State, any instrumentality of a State, and any officer or employee of a State or instrumentality of a State acting in his or her official capacity, shall not be immune, under the Eleventh Amendment of the Constitution of the United States or under any other doctrine of sovereign immunity, from suit in Federal Court by any person, including any governmental or nongovernmental entity, for a violation of any of the exclusive rights of a copyright owner provided by sections 106 through 122, for importing copies of phonorecords in violation of section 602, or for any other violation under this title.

Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, 584 U.S. ___ (2018), was a case in the Supreme Court of the United States that dealt with whether owners of public accommodations can refuse certain services based on the First Amendment claims of free speech and free exercise of religion, and therefore be granted an exemption from laws ensuring non-discrimination in public accommodations—in particular, by refusing to provide creative services, such as making a custom wedding cake for the marriage of a gay couple, on the basis of the owner's religious beliefs.

Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College is a lawsuit concerning racial discrimination in affirmative action programs in college admissions processes. The case involves Harvard University's undergraduate admissions process which is claimed to discriminate against Asian American applicants. With its companion case Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina, both seek review of the Supreme Court decision Grutter v. Bollinger (2003) which validated the use of affirmative action programs in college admissions as long as race is not used as the sole deciding factor. The two cases were originally granted certiorari and consolidated under the Harvard case in January 2022, but following the appointment of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, the cases were split with Jackson recusing from the Harvard case while participating in the North Carolina one.

<i>Kesha v. Dr. Luke</i> Civil lawsuit

Kesha v. Dr. Luke refers to a series of lawsuits and countersuits between the singer Kesha Rose Sebert (Kesha) and the music producer Lukasz Sebastian Gottwald. Sebert filed a civil suit against Gottwald in October 2014 for infliction of emotional distress, sex-based hate crimes and employment discrimination. Gottwald filed a lawsuit in New York Supreme Court in which he sued Sebert and her mother, Rosemary Patricia "Pebe" Sebert, for defamation and breach of contract.

Abbott v. Perez, 585 U.S. ___ (2018), was a United States Supreme Court case dealing with the redistricting of the state of Texas following the 2010 Census.

Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. ___ (2020), is a landmark United States Supreme Court civil rights case in which the Court held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees against discrimination because they are gay or transgender.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Black News Channel</span> American television news channel

The Black News Channel (BNC) was an American pay television news channel, targeting the African American demographic. The channel was based in Tallahassee, Florida, and launched on February 10, 2020. The station was co-founded by television executive Bob Brillante and former congressman J. C. Watts, who was also the network's chairman.

National Pork Producers Council v. Ross, 598 U.S. ___ (2023), was a United States Supreme Court case related to the Dormant Commerce Clause.

References

  1. 1 2 Comcast v. Nat'l Ass'n of African-American-Owned Media, No. 18-1171 , 589 U.S. ___(2020).
  2. ↑ 42 U.S.C.   § 1981.
  3. 1 2 James, Meg (February 23, 2015). "Byron Allen's Entertainment Studios sues Comcast for $20 billion". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved November 13, 2019.
  4. 1 2 Gardner, Eriq (September 22, 2019). "Byron Allen Tries Again in Racial Discrimination Lawsuit Against Comcast". The Hollywood Reporter . Retrieved November 13, 2019.
  5. ↑ Gardner, Eriq (February 23, 2019). "Comcast, Al Sharpton Hit With $20 Billion Racial Discrimination Lawsuit". The Hollywood Reporter . Retrieved November 13, 2019.
  6. ↑ Gardner, Eriq (August 7, 2015). "Comcast, Al Sharpton Beat $20B Racial Discrimination Lawsuit". The Hollywood Reporter . Retrieved November 13, 2019.
  7. ↑ Johnson, Ted (August 20, 2015). "Judge Will Let Byron Allen's Company Revive Case Against Comcast, Al Sharpton". Variety . Retrieved November 13, 2019.
  8. ↑ Patton, Dominic (May 10, 2016). "Comcast Granted Dismissal Of Byron Allen's $20B Discrimination Suit – For Now". Deadline Hollywood . Retrieved November 13, 2019.
  9. ↑ Littleton, Cynthia (December 28, 2015). "AT&T Settles Byron Allen Racial Discrimination Lawsuit, Picks Up 7 Channels". Variety . Retrieved November 13, 2019.
  10. ↑ Patton, Dominic (January 27, 2016). "FCC & Charter Slapped With $10B Racial Discrimination Lawsuit By Byron Allen". Deadline Hollywood . Retrieved November 13, 2019.
  11. ↑ Nat'l Ass'n of African-American Owned Media v. Charter Communications, Inc., No.2:16-cv-00609 , 57( C.D. Cal. Oct. 24, 2016).
  12. ↑ Gardner, Eriq (October 25, 2016). "$10 Billion Racial Discrimination Lawsuit Against Charter Survives First Amendment Scrutiny". The Hollywood Reporter . Retrieved November 13, 2019.
  13. ↑ Nat'l Ass'n of African-American Owned Media v. Charter Communications, Inc., 908F.3d1190 ( 9th Cir. 2018).
  14. ↑ Littleton, Cynthia (November 19, 2018). "Byron Allen's Racial Discrimination Lawsuits Against Comcast and Charter to Proceed". Variety . Retrieved November 13, 2019.
  15. ↑ Brodik, Jon (November 19, 2018). "Charter, Comcast don't have 1st Amendment right to discriminate, court rules". Ars Technica . Retrieved November 13, 2019.
  16. ↑ de Vogue, Ariane (June 10, 2019). "Supreme Court takes Comcast race discrimination case". CNN . Retrieved November 13, 2019.
  17. ↑ Littleton, Cynthia (March 8, 2019). "Charter Files Supreme Court Petition in Byron Allen Racial Discrimination Suit". Variety . Retrieved November 13, 2019.
  18. ↑ "Charter Communications Inc. v. National Association of African American-Owned Media". SCOTUSBlog . Retrieved November 13, 2019.
  19. ↑ Johnson, Ted (November 13, 2019). "Byron Allen Vs. Comcast: Supreme Court Case Poses Legal Risks And Political Fallout". Deadline Hollywood . Retrieved November 13, 2019.
  20. ↑ Littleton, Cynthia (November 13, 2019). "Supreme Court Justices Parse Legal Tests for Byron Allen Racial Discrimination Case Against Comcast". Variety . Retrieved November 13, 2019.
  21. 1 2 Univ. of Tex. Sw. Med. Ctr. v. Nassar , 570 U.S. 338 (2013).
  22. ↑ Johnson, Ted (March 23, 2020). "Supreme Court Rules That Byron Allen Has To Show Race Was Sole Cause In Lawsuit Against Comcast". Deadline Hollywood . Retrieved March 23, 2020.
  23. ↑ Higgens, Tucker (March 23, 2020). "Supreme Court hands win to Comcast in $20 billion racial discrimination suit". CNBC . Retrieved March 25, 2020.
  24. ↑ Patton, Dominic (November 8, 2019). "Comcast Threatened With Being "Broken Up" By Congressman As SCOTUS Battle With Byron Allen Nears". Deadline Hollywood . Retrieved November 13, 2019.
  25. ↑ Millhiser, Ian (March 25, 2020). "The Supreme Court handed down a unanimous decision that bodes ill for the future of civil rights". Vox . Retrieved March 25, 2020.
  26. ↑ Littleton, Cynthia (June 11, 2020). "Byron Allen and Comcast Settle Racial Discrimination Lawsuit, Set Carriage Deal for 3 Channels". Variety . Retrieved June 11, 2020.
  27. ↑ Del Rosario, Alexandra (August 29, 2020). "Byron Allen's Racial Discrimination Lawsuit Against Charter Communications Moves Forward". Deadline Hollywood . Retrieved August 29, 2020.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.