The Supreme Court handed the Federal Communications Commission a victory on Wednesday in a legal battle over who is entitled to favorable advertising rates in the closing weeks of the costly, hotly contested midterm elections.
The high court ruled 7-2 to halt a ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit that would have forced the FCC to issue a final ruling on a revised rule allowing political parties and joint fundraising committees to access the same, more favorable television advertisement rates that are typically reserved for political candidates. The Democratic congressional candidates who brought the challenge are hoping to strike down the revised rule due to their cash advantage with individual candidates, while Republicans have pushed for the new rule due to their significant cash advantage at the party level.
“The Fourth Circuit’s decision to issue an ‘extraordinary’ writ was inappropriate under the circumstances. The Communications Act requires the Commission to act on every application it receives, but it does not obligate the Commission to act within a particular timeframe. The Commission may exercise its discretion to set its own procedures and schedule for resolving such applications,” the justices’ per curiam ruling said. “Undeterred, the Fourth Circuit issued a mandamus order requiring the Commission to issue a final decision on the candidates’ application just five months after it was filed and within just 48 hours—all while the Commission’s deliberation process was still ongoing. Our system of separation of powers does not allow the Judiciary to meddle in ‘the workings of a coordinate branch of the Government’ in this manner.”
“To comply with the mandamus order, the FCC must triage its ongoing deliberation process and prepare a final order on an extremely expedited timeline. That the mandamus order requires the FCC to abandon its deliberation process is itself an injury that cannot be remedied after the fact. The FCC thus satisfies the stay factors,” the majority ruling said.
Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented from the ruling but did not elaborate on their decision to dissent. The 4th Circuit’s ruling was set to take effect last Friday, but Chief Justice John Roberts halted the lower court’s order temporarily last week while the full Supreme Court considered the emergency petition.
CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS GIVES FCC TEMPORARY WIN IN FIGHT OVER FAVORABLE CAMPAIGN AD RATE RULES
The emergency petition was the second time the legal battle had made its way to the Supreme Court in as many months. In September, the Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that the 4th Circuit had prematurely halted the rule, finding that the FCC must issue a decision on the Democratic candidates’ petition for review before the appeals court can get involved.
The battle over the FCC’s favorable ad rate rule is the latest election-related fight to make its way to the Supreme Court’s emergency docket in recent months. The other major fight on the emergency docket over the past several months has been regarding the Trump administration’s new mail ballot order, which the high court allowed to remain blocked through the midterm elections.