- Credits
- 54,437
The Supreme Court said yesterday that the Federal Communications Commission may penalize even the occasional use of certain expletives on the airwaves but left for another day the question of whether such a policy is constitutional.
The court's narrow ruling said the FCC -- prompted by Cher's use of the F-word during a 2002 live broadcast and similar remarks by what Justice Antonin Scalia called "foul-mouthed glitteratae from Hollywood" -- was justified in changing its policy in 2004 to fine broadcasters up to $325,000 every time certain words are allowed on the air.
"The commission could reasonably conclude that the pervasiveness of foul language, and the coarsening of public entertainment in other media such as cable, justify more stringent regulation of broadcast programs so as to give conscientious parents a relatively safe haven for their children," Scalia wrote for the five-member conservative majority.
Fox Television Stations and other networks had challenged FCC's actions under the Administrative Procedure Act. They said the agency did not adequately explain why it changed its policy, which previously held that one-time utterances of expletives did not constitute a violation of FCC rules.
The networks also challenged the rule under the First Amendment, but, like the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York, the Supreme Court did not rule on the question of constitutionality.
"Whether [the policy] is unconstitutional will be determined soon enough, perhaps in this very case," Scalia wrote in sending the case back to the appeals court. In the meantime, any suppressed "references to excretory and sexual material surely lie at the periphery of First Amendment concern."
The Parents Television Council, which had strenuously lobbied the commission to adopt the tougher stance, called the ruling "an incredible victory for families." It called on the FCC to "use today's opinion to . . . rule on the merits of the tens of thousands of indecency complaints currently awaiting review at the Commission."
Fox said it was disappointed but "optimistic that we will ultimately prevail when the First Amendment issues are fully aired before the courts."
Justices Clarence Thomas, who aligned with the majority, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who dissented, expressed constitutional concerns. Thomas said he was "open" to reviewing the court's decisions that gave the FCC constitutional authority to police the airwaves, and Ginsburg said there is "no way to hide the long shadow the First Amendment casts over what the commission has done."
more here
lets be honest here, in a few years it will be right to say the F-word anywhere.
The court's narrow ruling said the FCC -- prompted by Cher's use of the F-word during a 2002 live broadcast and similar remarks by what Justice Antonin Scalia called "foul-mouthed glitteratae from Hollywood" -- was justified in changing its policy in 2004 to fine broadcasters up to $325,000 every time certain words are allowed on the air.
"The commission could reasonably conclude that the pervasiveness of foul language, and the coarsening of public entertainment in other media such as cable, justify more stringent regulation of broadcast programs so as to give conscientious parents a relatively safe haven for their children," Scalia wrote for the five-member conservative majority.
Fox Television Stations and other networks had challenged FCC's actions under the Administrative Procedure Act. They said the agency did not adequately explain why it changed its policy, which previously held that one-time utterances of expletives did not constitute a violation of FCC rules.
The networks also challenged the rule under the First Amendment, but, like the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York, the Supreme Court did not rule on the question of constitutionality.
"Whether [the policy] is unconstitutional will be determined soon enough, perhaps in this very case," Scalia wrote in sending the case back to the appeals court. In the meantime, any suppressed "references to excretory and sexual material surely lie at the periphery of First Amendment concern."
The Parents Television Council, which had strenuously lobbied the commission to adopt the tougher stance, called the ruling "an incredible victory for families." It called on the FCC to "use today's opinion to . . . rule on the merits of the tens of thousands of indecency complaints currently awaiting review at the Commission."
Fox said it was disappointed but "optimistic that we will ultimately prevail when the First Amendment issues are fully aired before the courts."
Justices Clarence Thomas, who aligned with the majority, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who dissented, expressed constitutional concerns. Thomas said he was "open" to reviewing the court's decisions that gave the FCC constitutional authority to police the airwaves, and Ginsburg said there is "no way to hide the long shadow the First Amendment casts over what the commission has done."
more here
lets be honest here, in a few years it will be right to say the F-word anywhere.
