FCC v. Sanders Brothers Radio Station

Last updated
FCC v. Sanders Brothers Radio Station
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued February 9–, 1940
Decided March 25, 1940
Full case nameFederal Communications Commission v. Sanders Brothers Radio Station
Citations309 U.S. 470 ( more )
60 S.Ct. 693
Case history
PriorSanders Brothers Radio Station v. Federal Communications Commission, 106 F.2d 321; cert. granted, 308 U.S. 546(1939).
Holding
Spectrum allocation decisions made by the Federal Communications Commission are made to serve the public interest and do not have to consider broadcaster profitability or business plans.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Charles E. Hughes
Associate Justices
James C. McReynolds  · Harlan F. Stone
Owen Roberts  · Hugo Black
Stanley F. Reed  · Felix Frankfurter
William O. Douglas  · Frank Murphy
Case opinion
MajorityRoberts
McReynolds took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
Laws applied
Communications Act of 1934

Federal Communications Commission v. Sanders Brothers Radio Station, 309 U.S. 470 (1940), [1] was an early precedent on the enforcement of broadcasting law in the United States. The Supreme Court held that when the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) makes spectrum allocation decisions regarding the use of broadcast frequencies by radio stations, such decisions should be made to serve the public interest, convenience, and necessity as defined by the Communications Act of 1934. Consequently, such decisions by the FCC do not need to consider the profitability or business interests of the companies assigned such frequencies, or those of their competitors.

Contents

Background

In 1936, the Telegraph Herald , a newspaper in Dubuque, Iowa, applied to the FCC for a permit to construct a radio station, along with an allocated frequency on which to broadcast content. Shortly thereafter. the existing radio station WKBB in nearby East Dubuque, Illinois applied for a permit to move its transmitter to Dubuque. Upon learning of the Telegraph Herald application, the owners of WKBB appealed to the FCC to reject that application, in the belief that Dubuque did not have a large enough radio market for two different stations to be profitable, and that their frequencies would interfere with each other. Using language from the Communications Act of 1934, the owners of WKBB argued that allowing the Telegraph Herald to build a second station would not serve the public interest, convenience, and necessity for the Dubuque region. [1]

An FCC examiner originally agreed with WKBB's position, though the Commission eventually decided to grant both applications. The Commission concluded that there was no evidence that the two stations would interfere with each other; meanwhile, both applicants were qualified to operate radio stations, and having two competing stations would be a benefit for the Dubuque region. [1]

The owners of WKBB appealed this FCC decision to the District of Columbia Circuit Court, which held that the commission should have considered economic injury to the area's existing radio station (WKBB), and failing to do so resulted in an arbitrary and capricious licensing decision that was prohibited by American administrative law. [2] The FCC appealed this ruling to the United States Supreme Court.

Opinion of the court

The Supreme Court reversed the circuit court decision. The Telegraph Herald had argued previously that the Communications Act of 1934 includes no requirements for the FCC to consider economic injury or business profitability when issuing radio station licenses, and those matters cannot be implied from the statute's language concerning the public interest, convenience, and necessity of broadcast licensing decisions. It was also noted that the owners of WKBB provided no verifiable evidence of potential economic harm if a competing radio station began operating in the area. [1]

The Supreme Court viewed the dispute as an opportunity to examine the "function and powers" of the then relatively new FCC. The court held that the Communications Act "contains no express command that in passing upon an application the Commission must consider the effect of competition with an existing station", and that the Commission need only consider its statutory requirements for fostering the development of networks and managing the use of spectrum frequencies. According to the court, the commission's primary responsibility is to ensure that frequencies are used efficiently and to avoid interference, and since interference was not found to be a risk in the present dispute, the commission had acted appropriately in granting licenses to both operators. Furthermore, the Communications Act did not instruct the FCC to regulate the internal business operations of its licensees, and WKBB's complaint about unfair or damaging competition would instead be a matter for the Interstate Commerce Commission. [1]

Per Supreme Court precedent, broadcast frequencies were considered a matter of free competition in which the number of operators is only constrained by the scarcity of available frequencies, unlike other businesses such as railroads in which a new market entrant could have significant economic effects on the marketplace. [3] However, the FCC is enabled to consider the effects of competition among radio stations if the public interest would be impacted, which was not found to be the case in the present dispute. [1]

Impact

FCC v. Sanders Brothers Radio Station is often cited as a seminal ruling on the authority of the United States government, via the FCC, to regulate the broadcast radio and television industries, [4] and on the government's stance that the broadcasting market should benefit from free competition. [5] The case has also been cited as an instructive precedent on the then relatively new issue of judicial review of regulatory decisions by subject matter agencies, [6] such as the FCC's authority over the precise matter of spectrum allocation.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federal Communications Commission</span> Independent U.S. government agency

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is an independent agency of the United States government that regulates communications by radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable across the United States. The FCC maintains jurisdiction over the areas of broadband access, fair competition, radio frequency use, media responsibility, public safety, and homeland security.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Federal Radio Commission</span> Former government agency of the United States (1927–33)

The Federal Radio Commission (FRC) was a government agency that regulated United States radio communication from its creation in 1927 until 1934, when it was succeeded by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The FRC was established by the Radio Act of 1927, which replaced the Radio Act of 1912 after the earlier law was found to lack sufficient oversight provisions, especially for regulating broadcasting stations. In addition to increased regulatory powers, the FRC introduced the standard that, in order to receive a license, a radio station had to be shown to be "in the public interest, convenience, or necessity".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Communications Act of 1934</span> 1934 U.S. federal law creating the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)

The Communications Act of 1934 is a United States federal law signed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt on June 19, 1934, and codified as Chapter 5 of Title 47 of the United States Code, 47 U.S.C. § 151 et seq. The act replaced the Federal Radio Commission with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). It also transferred regulation of interstate telephone services from the Interstate Commerce Commission to the FCC.

The fairness doctrine of the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC), introduced in 1949, was a policy that required the holders of broadcast licenses both to present controversial issues of public importance and to do so in a manner that fairly reflected differing viewpoints. In 1987, the FCC abolished the fairness doctrine, prompting some to urge its reintroduction through either Commission policy or congressional legislation. The FCC removed the rule that implemented the policy from the Federal Register in August 2011.

National Broadcasting Co. v. United States, 319 U.S. 190 (1943), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the Federal Communications Commission had the power to issue regulations pertaining to associations between broadcasting networks and their affiliated stations, otherwise known as "chain networks." The case is important in the development of American administrative law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Radio Act of 1927</span> Former United States radio law from 1927 to 1934

The Radio Act of 1927 was signed into law on February 23, 1927. It replaced the Radio Act of 1912, increasing the federal government's regulatory powers over radio communication, with oversight vested in a newly created body, the Federal Radio Commission. It also was the first legislation to mandate that stations had to show they were "in the public interest, convenience, or necessity" in order to receive a license. The Act was later replaced by the Communications Act of 1934.

A broadcast license is a type of spectrum license granting the licensee permission to use a portion of the radio frequency spectrum in a given geographical area for broadcasting purposes. The licenses generally include restrictions, which vary from band to band.

National Cable & Telecommunications Association v. Brand X Internet Services, 545 U.S. 967 (2005), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that decisions by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on how to regulate Internet service providers are eligible for Chevron deference, in which the judiciary defers to an administrative agency's expertise under its governing statutes. While the case concerned routine regulatory processes at the FCC and applied to interpretations of the Communications Act of 1934 and Telecommunications Act of 1996, the ruling has become an important precedent on the matter of regulating network neutrality in the United States.

WCRW was an AM radio station in Chicago, Illinois, which operated on a "shared time" frequency until 1996 with two other stations, WEDC and WSBC, each broadcasting a part of the day.

WOPG is an AM radio station licensed to Albany, New York and serving the Capital District. It is owned by Pax et Bonum, Inc. and has a Christian radio format aimed at Roman Catholic listeners, with much of its programming coming from the EWTN Radio network. WOPG simulcasts with WOPG-FM at 89.9 FM in Esperance, New York.

Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications Commission, 395 U.S. 367 (1969), was a seminal First Amendment ruling at the United States Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held that radio broadcasters enjoyed free speech rights under the First Amendment, but those rights could be partially restricted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to maintain the public interest in equitable use of scarce broadcasting frequencies. As a result, the FCC's Fairness Doctrine was found to be constitutional.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">WHP (AM)</span> Radio station in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania

WHP is a commercial AM radio station licensed to Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, serving the Harrisburg metropolitan area of South Central Pennsylvania. It broadcasts a talk radio format and is owned by iHeartMedia, Inc. The studios are on Corporate Circle in Harrisburg, off North Progress Avenue.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">WDBQ (AM)</span> Radio station in Dubuque, Iowa

WDBQ is an AM radio station broadcasting a talk radio format. Located in Dubuque, Iowa, United States, the station is owned by Townsquare Media and licensed to Townsquare License, LLC.

<i>Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod v. FCC</i> 1998 court case

Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod v. FCC was a 1998 D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals case involving the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) enforcement of the Equal Employment Opportunity Act and the Fifth Amendment. The FCC claimed that the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod (LCMS) had violated the FCC's Equal Employment Opportunity requirements by not hiring enough minorities/women and by requiring a knowledge of Lutheran doctrine in order to be hired to work at its two FM and AM radio stations located in Clayton, Missouri.

Media cross-ownership is the common ownership of multiple media sources by a single person or corporate entity. Media sources include radio, broadcast television, specialty and pay television, cable, satellite, Internet Protocol television (IPTV), newspapers, magazines and periodicals, music, film, book publishing, video games, search engines, social media, internet service providers, and wired and wireless telecommunications.

Radio regulation in the United States was enforced to eliminate different stations from broadcasting on each other's airwaves. Regulated by the Federal Communications Commission, standardization was encouraged by the chronological and economic advances experienced by the United States of America. Commenced in 1910, before the Communications Act of 1934 was passed, the Federal Radio Commission was the first organization established to control the functioning of radio as a whole through the Commerce Clause. Airwaves run across interstate and international waters, leading to some form of regulation. As years progressed, deregulation was strongly encouraged to provide a little independence from the government.

The 1978 Broadcast Policy Statement on minority ownership is a publicly issued statement by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding the state of minority and gender based ownership, the implications of previous ownership policies, and by taking affirmative action set into place two new additional policy measures aimed at progressing and encouraging continued diversity in media ownership. In this statement the FCC officially set forward two new programs favoring minority ownership of broadcasting facilities.

The Davis Amendment was a provision attached to the March 28, 1928 reauthorization of the Radio Act of 1927, which mandated an "equality of radio broadcasting service" within the United States. It specified an "equitable allocation" among five regional zones, in addition to assignments proportional to population among the states within each zone. Its implementation resulted in the development of a complicated quota system by the Federal Radio Commission, and although its provisions were carried over to the Federal Communications Commission by the Communications Act of 1934, it ultimately proved impractical, and was repealed on June 5, 1936.

KBMX was a radio station on 101.9 FM in Eldon, Missouri, which broadcast between 1988 and 2001.

<i>Trinity Methodist Church, South v. Federal Radio Commission</i> Court case

Trinity Methodist Church, South v. Federal Radio Commission, 62 F.2d 850 (1932), was an early precedent on the enforcement of broadcasting law in the United States. The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld a decision by the Federal Radio Commission (FRC) to deny a broadcasting license for radio station KGEF, due to controversial content broadcast by Robert P. Shuler. The court held that the public interest in appropriate content on the broadcast airwaves can override free speech concerns under the First Amendment, and that the denial of a radio station license is acceptable if done per due process of law requirements under the Fifth Amendment.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Federal Communications Commission v. Sanders Brothers Radio Station, 309 U.S. 470 (1940).
  2. ↑ Sanders Brothers Radio Station v. Federal Communications Commission, 106 F.2d 321 (D.C. Cir., 1939).
  3. ↑ Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Gulf, Colorado, and Santa Fe Railway Co., 270 U.S. 266 (1926).
  4. ↑ Stukas, William B. (June 1962). "The Federal Communications Commission and Program Regulation - Violation of the First Amendment". Nebraska Law Review. 41 (4): 826–827 – via HeinOnline.
  5. ↑ Meeks, James E. (October 1966). "Economic Entry Controls in FCC Licensing: The Carroll Case Reappraised". Iowa Law Review. 52 (2): 239–240 – via HeinOnline.
  6. ↑ Black, Arthur Clifton (Fall 1970). "Standing for Review of Actions by Federal Administrative Agencies: A New Test". University of Florida Law Review. 23 (1): 207–208 – via HeinOnline.
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.