Administrative Law and the Federal Communications Commission

Amy Sindik
{"title":"Administrative Law and the Federal Communications Commission","authors":"Amy Sindik","doi":"10.1080/10811680.2021.1937004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The decision of the Federal Communications Commission to repeal net neutrality regulations in 2018 was met with legal challenges arguing that the Commission did not have authority under administrative law to make such sweeping policy changes. In light of the net neutrality court battles, this historical analysis of FCC cases examines the way the Supreme Court of the United States has evaluated the FCC’s regulatory authority in cases that invoke economic considerations. The analysis indicates that the Court interprets both the Communications Act and Administrative Procedures Act as providing the FCC with considerable latitude to determine ways to regulate economic focused areas of communications, including the license application process, regulation of new technologies and challenges from citizens groups.","PeriodicalId":42622,"journal":{"name":"Communication Law and Policy","volume":"26 1","pages":"312 - 335"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Communication Law and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10811680.2021.1937004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The decision of the Federal Communications Commission to repeal net neutrality regulations in 2018 was met with legal challenges arguing that the Commission did not have authority under administrative law to make such sweeping policy changes. In light of the net neutrality court battles, this historical analysis of FCC cases examines the way the Supreme Court of the United States has evaluated the FCC’s regulatory authority in cases that invoke economic considerations. The analysis indicates that the Court interprets both the Communications Act and Administrative Procedures Act as providing the FCC with considerable latitude to determine ways to regulate economic focused areas of communications, including the license application process, regulation of new technologies and challenges from citizens groups.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
行政法和联邦通信委员会
美国联邦通信委员会(fcc)在2018年废除网络中立规定的决定遭遇了法律挑战,有人认为,根据行政法,该委员会没有权力进行如此彻底的政策改革。鉴于网络中立法庭之争,本文对联邦通信委员会案件的历史分析考察了美国最高法院在援引经济考虑的案件中评估联邦通信委员会监管权力的方式。分析表明,法院对《通信法案》和《行政程序法》的解释为为FCC提供了相当大的自由,以确定监管通信经济重点领域的方式,包括许可证申请程序、新技术监管和公民团体的挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
33.30%
发文量
7
期刊介绍: The societal, cultural, economic and political dimensions of communication, including the freedoms of speech and press, are undergoing dramatic global changes. The convergence of the mass media, telecommunications, and computers has raised important questions reflected in analyses of modern communication law, policy, and regulation. Serving as a forum for discussions of these continuing and emerging questions, Communication Law and Policy considers traditional and contemporary problems of freedom of expression and dissemination, including theoretical, conceptual and methodological issues inherent in the special conditions presented by new media and information technologies.
期刊最新文献
Digital Rights in Europe After the Entry Into Force of Regulations for the Protection of Personal Data: Before and After the Right to Be Forgotten Regulatory Capture in a Transitional Democracy: Media Laws in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq Paranoid Androids: Free Speech Versus Privacy in America’s Resistance Against Intrusive Robocalls An Unreasonable Standard?: The Dilemma of Applying Actual Malice to Irrational Speakers “The Gloss of History”: A Historical Analysis of U.S. Supreme Court Justices’ Framing of First Amendment Press Rights to Cover and Access Court Proceedings
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1