Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for a unanimous Court that the
FCC’s actions violated due process because the agency failed to give
broadcasters “fair notice prior to the broadcasts in question that fleeting
expletives and momentary nudity could be found actionably indecent.”
The dispute arose out of a change in enforcement
policy. In 2001, the FCC announced
that it would no longer punish fleeting and isolated uses of expletives. In this case, however, the FCC did impose
penalties for fleeting nudity on the television drama NYPD Blue and the use of
the “F-word” by Cher and Nicole Richie on awards shows.
While striking down the penalties in this case on the ground
that the enforcement policies did not give broadcasters sufficient notice of
actionable conduct, the Court stated that the FCC was “free to modify its current
indecency policy in light of its determination of the public interest and
applicable legal requirements.”
The Court declined to issue a broader ruling on the
Constitutionality of the FCC's indecency policies under the First Amendment. As a result, the ruling does not change
the FCC’s substantive authority to regulate indecency on broadcast television.
An interesting side note is that this dispute arose out of events
that happened about a decade ago, in 2002 and 2003. Broadcasters had argued in this case that the indecency
regulations, which apply only to broadcast channels, were obsolete in light of
the diversity of media available through the Internet, cable and satellite
television, smart phones and related devices.
Given the speed with which technology and media are
changing, it is fair to ask what technology and media will look like a decade
from now, and whether a substantive legal challenge initiated today will be
upheld if the Supreme Court finally gets the issue in about 2022.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.