May 19, 2025, opinions

Posted on by tadbartlett

Designated for publication

  • National Religious Broadcasters v. Federal Communications Commission, 24-60219, c/w Texas Association of Broadcasters v. FCC, 24-60226, petition for review of FCC order
    • Elrod, C.J. (Elrod, Jones, Stewart), administrative law, First Amendment
    • Vacating FCC order requiring certain disclosures by broadcasters of employment demographics information.
    • Petitioners challenged the FCC’s order requiring broadcasters to submit employment data through Form 395-B, raising four arguments, but the Court focused solely on the first: whether the FCC had statutory authority to mandate the form. The FCC cited its general public-interest mandate under the Communications Act of 1934 and several related provisions, claiming that Form 395-B collection supports its public service goals. However, the Court held that the FCC’s public-interest authority must be connected to a specific statutory mandate. Since none of the cited statutes authorized the collection of employment demographic data, and the FCC failed to show how this data collection furthered any core function like licensing, the Court concluded that the FCC lacked the authority to require submission of Form 395-B under the public-interest provisions.
    • The Court also rejected the FCC’s argument that the 1992 Cable Act ratified its authority to collect Form 395-B data. While the Act referred to employment data collection, it explicitly tied such collection to equal employment opportunity (EEO) regulations that are no longer in effect due to a prior court ruling striking down key provisions as unconstitutional. Moreover, the FCC itself disclaimed any link between the data collection and current EEO enforcement. Because the FCC’s claimed authority depended on now-defunct regulations and could not be supported under existing law, the Court concluded that the FCC lacked the statutory authority to require Form 395-B. As a result, it did not consider the remaining constitutional or procedural claims raised by the petitioners.

Unpublished decisions

  • Martin v. Hutson, 24-30451, appeal from E.D. La.
    • per curiam (King, Jones, Oldham), sec. 1983, sec. 1981, employment discrimination
    • Affirming dismissal of claims that plaintiff was fired by sheriff because of his race and/or sex.
  • U.S. v. Marquez-Floriano, 24-50735, appeal from W.D. Tex.
    • per curiam (Richman, Douglas, Ramirez), criminal, sentencing
    • Affirming sentence on conviction of illegal reentry.