By John Kruzel
WASHINGTON, Oct 14 (Reuters) – The US Supreme Court again sided with Republicans on Wednesday in the latest clash over a new Federal Communications Commission policy that gives party committees access to discounted TV and radio advertising rates long available to political candidates.
The court agreed to let the FCC, which is chaired by Trump ally Brendan Carr, avoid a judicially imposed deadline that would have forced the agency to rule on a Democratic challenge to the policy before the November 3 midterm elections. The FCC joined two Republican committees in filing a request to the Supreme Court to lift the lower court’s deadline.
The court has a 6-3 conservative majority. Liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson indicated they would have denied the request.
The FCC, which currently has a 2-1 Republican majority, modified its so-called “lowest unit charge” rule in March in a move seen as a boost to President Donald Trump’s fellow Republicans. The president’s party is seeking to retain control of Congress in the November 3 midterms.
“We are pleased the Supreme Court has granted the FCC’s stay request. The court’s decision is right on the law and avoids the specter of upending the rules for political ads right in the middle of an ongoing election,” an FCC spokesperson said.
Chief Justice John Roberts had previously lifted the October 9 deadline that was given to the FCC by the Richmond-based 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals. The 4th Circuit has accused the FCC of repeated “delay tactics” in the case, and emphasized the need for an urgent ruling in the Democratic challenge given the looming election.
The Supreme Court’s latest action marks the second time in recent weeks that it has addressed the FCC’s policy, as major Republican committees head toward the midterms with a cash advantage over their Democratic counterparts.
In September, the court granted a request by the national Republican committees that support the party’s candidates in Senate and House of Representatives races to revive the policy after the 4th Circuit blocked it. The justices in an 8-1 ruling said that the Democratic candidates must wait for the FCC to rule before filing a challenge in court.
The FCC policy at issue requires broadcasters to charge discounted rates for airing certain political advertisements within 60 days of a general election, a window that opened this year on September 4.
A group of Democratic candidates including Senator Jon Ossoff of Georgia in April challenged the policy through in-house proceedings at the FCC. When the agency took no action, the Democrats successfully challenged the policy in the 4th Circuit, a ruling that was later halted by the Supreme Court.
The 4th Circuit on October 7 ordered the FCC to issue a prompt ruling on the Democratic in-house challenge, more than five months after it was filed. In its 2-1 ruling, the 4th Circuit said its “willingness to tolerate the FCC’s delay tactics is at an end.”
‘TRENCH WARFARE’
The Republican committees in their Supreme Court filing accused the 4th Circuit of having “short-circuited” the FCC’s review process.
The Democratic candidates, for their part, accused the FCC in court papers of engaging in “blatant procedural trench warfare to stave off judicial review of an unlawful agency directive until it is too late to matter.”
The FCC policy gained greater significance after the Supreme Court in June struck down federal restrictions on spending coordinated between parties and their candidates, siding with Republican challengers including Vice President JD Vance. Since the June ruling, Republican committees have blown past the former limits ahead of the midterms.
The two Republican committees have exceeded the former national caps by more than $48 million, according to Federal Election Commission spending disclosures for July and August. Their Democratic counterparts also eclipsed the former limits, but by much less — just under $4 million.
The three main national Republican committees ended August with about $233 million in cash. Their Democratic counterparts held roughly $130 million but also carried nearly $18 million in debt, according to Federal Election Commission filings.
(Reporting by John Kruzel; Editing by Will Dunham)
Comments