In her dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson approvingly cited Fourth Circuit Judge James Wynn’s opinion that agencies should not be allowed to “reserve to themselves the power to override judicial review by delay or inaction.” Jackson also referenced her earlier opinion, which noted that courts routinely treat statutory requirements claimants must complete before filing a lawsuit as “non-jurisdictional.” She added that the Supreme Court has not yet ruled that any statutory exhaustion requirement automatically limits a court’s jurisdiction. Read the Supreme Court judgment.
Political advertising dispute involves a growing number of groups
The Democratic candidates challenging the Federal Communications Commission’s order involving television stations include former Ohio Senator and current candidate Sherrod Brown, Georgia Senator Jon Ossoff, former North Carolina Governor and Senate candidate Roy Cooper, and Michigan Representative Kristen McDonald Rivet.
In a filing with the Supreme Court, the candidates argued that the Fourth Circuit reasonably concluded that the FCC had effectively dismissed the application by failing to act after signaling that it intended to deny the request. They also maintained that the federal appellate courts are not divided on the issue. Read the respondents’ opposition to the application for a stay.
The U.S. Department of Justice and the FCC filed a response supporting the Republican committee’s position. The federal government argued that the Fourth Circuit lacked jurisdiction and that the FCC correctly interpreted federal campaign-finance and broadcasting laws in its directive to television stations. Read the government’s response.
The government also argued that it does not matter whether a political party helps pay for a candidate’s broadcast advertising. Section 315(b) of the Communications Act focuses on whether a candidate is “exploiting” a broadcast station, not on who finances the advertisement. If a candidate advertises in coordination with a political party and publicly approves the message, the candidate may be considered to be using the station even if the party covers some or all of the advertising costs.
The Trump administration’s position was challenged by the Campaign Legal Center, a nonprofit organization founded by former Republican Federal Election Commission Chairman Trevor Potter. In its amicus brief, the group argued that the FCC’s interpretation “severely distorts the plain meaning of the Communications Act and the clearly expressed intent of Congress.” The organization also warned that the agency’s position lacks a meaningful limiting principle.
According to the Campaign Legal Center, the petitioners’ interpretation could allow a wide range of political organizations to participate in a broadcaster’s lowest unit charge, or LUC, rules. For example, a candidate’s decision to include a group in a joint fundraising campaign—or to endorse or approve an independent committee—could potentially make that group eligible for the LUC. The result, the group argued, could expand the law’s coverage and increase broadcasters’ financial obligations to an ever-growing number of organizations.
Source: arstechnica.com