FCC v. Nextwave Communications, Inc.

Media Items
FCC v. Nextwave Communications, Inc. - Oral Argument
Get Adobe Flash Player
FCC v. Nextwave Communications, Inc. - Opinion Announcement
Get Adobe Flash Player
Advocates
Paul D. Clement (Argued the cause on behalf of petitioner Federal Communications Commission)
Donald B. Verrilli, Jr. (Argued the cause for the respondents)
Laurence H. Tribe (Argued the cause on behalf of Creditors NextWave Communications, Inc., as amicus curiae)
Jonathan S. Franklin (Argued the cause on behalf of the petitioners Arctic Slope Regional Corp., et al)
Case Basics
Docket No.: 
01-653
Petitioner: 
Federal Communications Commission
Respondent: 
Nextwave Communications, Inc.
Consolidation: 
No. 01-657
Opinion: 
537 U.S. 293 (2003)
Location No location information present.

Cite this page
The Oyez Project, FCC v. Nextwave Communications, Inc. , 537 U.S. 293 (2003)
available at: (http://oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2002/2002_01_653)
Facts of the Case: 

After the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) auctioned off certain broadband personal communications services licenses to NextWave Personal Communications, Inc., Nextwave filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection and suspended payments to all creditors, including the FCC. The FCC asserted that NextWave's licenses had been canceled automatically when the company missed its first payment-deadline and announced that NextWave's licenses were available for auction. Ultimately, when the FCC denied NextWave's petition for reconsideration of the license cancellation, the Court of Appeals for the D. C. Circuit held that the cancellation violated 11 USC section 525(a), which provides that a "governmental unit may not...revoke...a license...to...a debtor...solely because such...debtor...has not paid a debt that is dischargeable in the case." (Together with No. 01-657, Arctic Slope Regional Corp. et al. v. NextWave Personal Communications Inc. et al.)

Question: 

Does section 525 of the Bankruptcy Code prohibit the Federal Communications Commission from revoking licenses held by a debtor in bankruptcy upon the debtor's failure to make timely payments owed to the FCC for purchase of the licenses?

Conclusion: 

Yes. In an 8-1 opinion delivered by Justice Antonin Scalia, the Court held that the FCC's cancellations of the licenses violated section 525(a) as revocations of government licenses solely for nonpayment of the debtors' dischargeable debts. The Court rejected the FCC's argument that it did not revoke NextWave's licenses solely because of nonpayment and noted that the fact that the FCC had a valid regulatory motive for its action was irrelevant. Justice Scalia reasoned that, because the statute refers to failure to pay a debt as the sole cause of cancellation, it cannot reasonably be understood to include the governmental unit's motive in effecting the cancellation, since such a reading would deprive section 525 of force. Justice John Paul Stevens filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. Justice Stephen G. Breyer authored a dissenting opinion.

Decisions

Decision: 8 votes for Nextwave Communications, Inc., 1 vote(s) against
Legal provision: Bankruptcy Code, Bankruptcy Act or Rules, or Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978

Sort by Ideology

Voted with the majority
Rehnquist
Wrote a regular concurrence
Stevens
Voted with the majority
O'Connor
Wrote the majority opinion
Scalia
Voted with the majority
Kennedy
Voted with the majority
Souter
Voted with the majority
Thomas
Voted with the majority
Ginsburg
Wrote a dissent
Breyer

Full Opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia

Sponsor