Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:

 

FCC v. FOX TELEVISION STATIONS

Docket No.: 10-1293
Certiorari Granted: 06/27/11
Argued: January 10, 2012
Decided: 06/21/12

Topics:

Administrative Procedure, Due Process, Fifth Amendment, First Amendment, Hobbs Act, patent, privacy, stare decisis

PartyNames: Federal Communications Commission, et al. v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., et al.
Petitioner: Federal Communications Commission, et al.
Respondent: Fox Television Stations, Inc., et al.

Court Below: United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Citation: 613 F.3d 317
Supreme Court Docket

Federal Communications Commission, et al.
v.
Fox Television Stations, Inc., et al.
Consideration Limited:

GRANTED LIMITED TO FOLLOWING QUESTION: "WHETHER THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS CURRENT INDECENCY-ENFORCEMENT REGIME VIOLATES THE FIRST OR FIFTH AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION." JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR TOOK NO PART.

Question Presented:

1. Whether the court of appeals erred in invalidating a finding by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that a broadcast including expletives was indecent within the meaning of statutory and regulatory prohibitions on indecent broadcasts, on the ground that the FCC's context-based approach to determining indecency is unconstitutionally vague in its entirety. 2. Whether the court of appeals erred in invalidating a finding by the FCC that a broadcast including nudity was indecent within the meaning of statutory and regulatory prohibitions on indecent broadcasts, on the ground that the FCC's context-based approach to determining indecency is unconstitutionally vague in its entirety.

Question:

Does the current indecency enforcement regime violate the First or Fifth Amendments?

FCC v. FOX TELEVISION STATIONS
ORAL ARGUMENT

01/10/12

Listen to Oral Argument in FCC v. FOX TELEVISION STATIONS
Holding: VACATED AND REMANDED (SS no part)
Vote: 8-0
Majority: Kennedy, Chief Justice Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Breyer, Alito, Kagan
Concurring: Ginsburg
Recused: Sotomayor
Opinion By:

Warning: Use of undefined constant caseTitle - assumed 'caseTitle' (this will throw an Error in a future version of PHP) in /home/supremec/public_html/supremecourtobserver.com/code/sofunctionsndb.php on line 1147

FCC v. FOX TELEVISION STATIONS
Case Documents

1FCC v. FOX TELEVISION STATIONS Oral Argument Audio
2FCC v. FOX TELEVISION STATIONS Oral Argument Transcript (HTML)
3FCC v. FOX TELEVISION STATIONS Oral Argument Transcript (PDF)
4FCC v. FOX TELEVISION STATIONS Oral Argument Audio (January 10, 2012)
5Opinion in FCC v. FOX TELEVISION STATIONS
6REPLY BRIEF FOR PETITIONER
7BRIEF FOR PETITIONER
8BRIEF AMICUS CURIAE OF MORALITY IN MEDIA
9BRIEF FOR NATIONAL RELIGIOUS BROADCASTERS AS AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITIONER
10AMICUS BRIEF OF DECENCY ENFORCEMENT CENTER FOR TELEVISION SUPPORTING PETITIONERS
11BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE FOCUS ON THE FAMILY AND FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS
12BRIEF OF PARENTS TELEVISION COUNCILAS AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS
13BRIEF OF RESPONDENTS ABC TELEVISION AFFILIATES ASSOCIATION ET AL
14BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE YALE LAW SCHOOL INFORMATION SOCIETY PROJECT SCHOLARS, NEW AMERICA FOUNDATION, AND PROFESSOR MONROE PRICE IN SUPPORT OF NEITHER PARTY
15BRIEF FOR RESPONDENTS CBS TELEVISION NETWORK AFFILIATES ASSOCIATION AND NBC TELEVISION AFFILIATES
16BRIEF FOR RESPONDENTS ABC, INC.; KTRK TELEVISION, INC.; AND WLS TELEVISION, INC.
17BRIEF OF RESPONDENTS FOX TELEVISION STATIONS, INC., NBC UNIVERSAL MEDIA, LLC, CBS BROADCASTING INC., & FBC TELEVISION AFFILIATES ASSOCIATION
18BRIEF OF THE PENNSYLVANIACENTER FOR THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND THE MARION B. BRECHNER FIRST AMENDMENT PROJECTIN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS
19Brief Of The CATO Institute, Center For Democracy & Technology, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Public Knowledge, And TechFreedom As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondents
20BRIEF OF PUBLIC BROADCASTING SERVICE AS AMICUS CURIAE SUPPORTING RESPONDENTS
21Brief Amici Curiae of The Reporters Committee for Freedom of The Press and The E.W. Scripps Company In Support of Respondents
22BRIEF FOR AMICI CURIAE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCASTERS AND RADIO-TELEVISION DIGITAL NEWS ASSOCIATION IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS
23BRIEF OF RESPONDENTS CENTER FOR CREATIVE VOICES IN MEDIA AND THE FUTURE OF MUSIC COALITION
24BRIEF AMICUS CURIAE OF THE STUDENT PRESS LAW CENTER AND COLLEGE BROADCASTERS, INC., IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS
25BRIEF FOR AMICI CURIAE FORMER FCC OFFICIALS IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS
26BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS, AMERICAN ACADEMY OF CHILD AND ADOLESCENT PSYCHIATRY, BENTON FOUNDATION, CHILDREN NOW, AND UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST OFFICE OF COMMUNICATION, INC. IN SUPPORT OF AFFIRMANCE
27BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE OF THE AMERICAN CIVILLIBERTIES UNION, THE NEW YORK CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, THE AMERICAN BOOKSELLERS FOUNDATION FOR FREE EXPRESSION, THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TELEVISION AND RADIO ARTISTS, AFL-CIO,DIRECTORS GUILD OF AMERICA, MINNESOTA PUBLIC RADIO/AMERICAN PUBLIC MEDIA, THE NATIONALALLIANCE FOR MEDIA ARTS AND CULTURE, THE NATIONAL COALITION AGAINST CENSORSHIP, THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF COMMUNITY BROADCASTERS, PEN AMERICAN CENTER, SCREENACTORS GUILD, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RADIO, THE TULLY CENTER FOR FREE SPEECH, WASHINGTONAREA LAWYERS FOR THE ARTS, THE WOODHULL FREEDOM FOUNDATION, AND WRITERS GUILD OFAMERICA, WEST, IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS
Additional documents for this case are pending review.