Federal Communications Commission v. Fox Television Stations, Inc.

FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc
Name
Institution Affiliation
Course
Date of Submission
The Federal communication Commission FCC is a government agency whose responsibility is regulation of radio and television stations airwaves. The agency has expanded greatly by regulating indecency, which has its origin from FCC. There are several broadcasters that have sought the review of the FCC policies presenting the Supreme Court with challenges to the FCC regulatory powers over the airwave for several decades (Barron, 2012). This essay will examine the incident of FCC v. Fox Stations Inc. by evaluating the legal background and the position of FCC and respondents in determining whether the new policy is overly vague and afoul to the first and fifth amendment, and because all broadcasters needs to operate free of almost any restrictions on their content. Fox television Inc. had appealed with respect to the FCC’s ruling of the indecency policy which is perceived as subjective and unpredictable.
The second circuit of FCC was rejected by the Supreme Court due to impermissible vagueness of its policy. The case was returned to the Supreme Court to determine the authority of FCC to regulate instances of nudity and expletive use. The decision of the Supreme Court will affect the contents of a broadcaster to be aired during the day and primetime programming. There have been Questions raised to determine whether the supreme court erred in validating findings by FCC that broadcasters were including indecency to the meaning of statutory and regulation prohibitions(Houska, 2012). The issue in this case is to determine whether the FCC new indecency policy is overly vague and runs afoul of the first and fifth amendments.
The FCC is empowered by the federal law to regulate the indecency and disrespectful language, and to fine broadcasters who violate the indecency prohibition. The agency has enforced actions that regulate indecency through issuing policy statements aimed at clarifying the industry’s regulation standards of indecent speech. There are subsequent ensuing enforcement actions that the FCC has considered to confirm passing regarding the use of profanity that is presumptively indecent (Barron, 2012). Therefore, the conclusion of the commission policy change with respect to the second circuit regarding FCC was arbitrary and unpredictable of the administrative procedure Act. The second circuit found that the FCC’s failed to justify the evident abandonment of its previous policy which permitted fleeting expletives (Barron, 2012).
Although The Supreme Court ruled that FCC could regulate broadcast programmers to provide viewers with profanity free content, the institution of the new policy by FCC was found to be vague and unconstitutional in its entirety. The FCC was disputing that the new indecency policy does not violate the first and fifth amendments as applied or on the face to the broadcast at issues of the case. Fox te...