CITY OF EUGENE, OREGON (19-4161); CITY OF PORTLAND, OREGON, ET AL. (19-4162); STATE OF HAWAII (19-4163); ALLIANCE FOR COMMUNICATIONS DEMOCRACY, ET AL. (19-4164); ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, MARYLAND, ET AL. (19-4165); CITY OF PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA (19-4166); CITY OF CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, ET AL. (19-4183) v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, NCTA - THE INTERNET & TELEVISION ASSOCIATION (19-4161–4166/4183); CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK, ET AL. (19-4162); BLOOMFIELD TOWNSHIP, MICHIGAN, ET AL. (19-4165); CITY OF AURORA, COLORADO, ET AL. (19-4183) - Articles

All Content

CITY OF EUGENE, OREGON (19-4161); CITY OF PORTLAND, OREGON, ET AL. (19-4162); STATE OF HAWAII (19-4163); ALLIANCE FOR COMMUNICATIONS DEMOCRACY, ET AL. (19-4164); ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, MARYLAND, ET AL. (19-4165); CITY OF PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA (19-4166); CITY OF CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, ET AL. (19-4183) v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION; UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, NCTA - THE INTERNET & TELEVISION ASSOCIATION (19-4161–4166/4183); CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK, ET AL. (19-4162); BLOOMFIELD TOWNSHIP, MICHIGAN, ET AL. (19-4165); CITY OF AURORA, COLORADO, ET AL. (19-4183)

Posted by: Karen Belcher on May 26, 2021

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Tillman L. Lay, SPIEGEL & MCDIARMID LLP, Washington, D.C., Cheryl A. Leanza, BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP, Washington, D.C., for Petitioners.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Maureen K. Flood, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, Washington, D.C., for Respondents.

Attorneys 3: ARGUED: Jessica Ring Amunson, JENNER & BLOCK, LLP, Washington, D.C., for Intervenor NCTA.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Tillman L. Lay, James N. Horwood, Jeffrey M. Bayne, SPIEGEL & MCDIARMID LLP, Washington, D.C., Cheryl A. Leanza, Joseph Van Eaton, Gerard Lavery Lederer, BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP, Washington, D.C., Gail A. Karish, BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP, Los Angeles, California, Michael R. Bradley, Vincent Rotty, Michael Clarke Athay, BRADLEY LAW, LLC, Woodbury, Minnesota, Michael J. Watza, KITCH DRUTCHAS WAGNER VALITUTTI & SHERBROOK, Detroit, Michigan, Daniel S. Cohen, Joel S. Winston, COHEN LAW GROUP, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Kenneth S. Fellman, KISSINGER & FELLMAN, P.C., Denver, Colorado, Brian T. Grogan, MOSS & BARNETT, Minneapolis, Minnesota, for Petitioners and Intervenors.

Attorneys 5: ON BRIEF: Maureen K. Flood, Jacob M. Lewis, FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, Washington, D.C., Robert B. Nicholson, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondents. Jessica Ring Amunson, Howard J. Symons, Ian Heath Gershengorn, Elizabeth B. Deutsch, JENNER & BLOCK, LLP, Washington, D.C., for Intervenor NCTA. Elina Druker, NEW YORK CITY OFFICE OF THE CORPORATION COUNSEL, New York, New York, for Intervenors City of New York, et al.

Judge(s): McKEAGUE, GRIFFIN, and KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: On Petitions for Review from an Order of the Federal Communications Commission

KETHLEDGE, Circuit Judge. Over the past 15 years, the Federal Communications Commission has published a series of written orders that, together with Title VI of the Communications Act (“the Act”), 47 U.S.C. § 521 et seq., set forth rules by which state and local governments may regulate cable providers. Numerous local governments have petitioned for review of the FCC’s most recent order, arguing that the FCC misinterpreted the Act. We grant the petitions in part and deny them in part.

Attachments: