The Oyez Project Virtual Tour of the Supreme Court Building

Abstract

Argument: Monday, January 16, 1984
Decision: Monday, July 2, 1984
Issues: First Amendment, Miscellaneous

Advocates

Samuel Alito, Jr. (Argued the cause for the appellant)
Frederic D. Woocher (Argued the cause for the appellees)

Facts of the Case

The Public Broadcasting Act of 1967 allocated federal funds to noncommercial television and radio stations to support operations and educational programming. The act did not allow stations receiving money under the act to "engage in editorializing."

Question

Did the ban on editorializing violate the First Amendment?

Conclusion

Yes. Even though the Commerce Clause gives Congress the power to regulate the broadcast medium, "since broadcasters are engaged in a vital and independent form of communicative activity," Congress must use the First Amendment to "inform and give shape" to its regulation. Justice Brennan argued that no legitimate government interest was served by the law which broadly banned all editorializing, a form of speech which "lies at the heart of First Amendment protection."

Supreme Court Justice Opinions and Votes (by Ideology)

Sort by Seniority
(More information here)
Decision: 5 votes for League of Women Voters of California, 4 vote(s) against
Legal Provision: 47 U.S.C. 399
Voted with the majority
Marshall
Wrote the majority opinion
Brennan
Wrote a dissent
Stevens
Voted with the majority
Blackmun
Wrote a dissent, joined Rehnquist's dissent
White
Voted with the majority
Powell
Voted with the minority, joined Rehnquist's dissent
Burger
Voted with the majority
O'Connor
Wrote a dissent
Rehnquist
Full Opinion by Justice William J. Brennan, Jr.

Cite this page

The Oyez Project, FCC v. League of Women Voters of California, 468 U.S. 364 (1984),
available at: <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1980-1989/1983/1983_82_912/>
(last visited ).