News: 0180570080

  ARM Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life (Terry Pratchett, Jingo)

Supreme Court Takes Case That Could Strip FCC of Authority To Issue Fines (arstechnica.com)

(Monday January 12, 2026 @05:50PM (BeauHD) from the what-to-expect dept.)


An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica:

> The Supreme Court will hear a case that [1]could invalidate the Federal Communications Commission's authority to issue fines against companies regulated by the FCC . AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile challenged the FCC's ability to punish them after the commission fined the carriers for selling customer location data without their users' consent. AT&T convinced the US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit to [2]overturn its fine (PDF), while [3]Verizon lost in the 2nd Circuit and [4]T-Mobile lost in the District of Columbia Circuit. Verizon [5]petitioned (PDF) the Supreme Court to reverse its loss, while the FCC and Justice Department [6]petitioned (PDF) the court to overturn AT&T's victory in the 5th Circuit. The Supreme Court granted both petitions to hear the challenges and consolidated the cases in a [7]list of orders (PDF) released Friday. Oral arguments will be held.

>

> In 2024, the FCC [8]fined the big three carriers a total of $196 million for location data sales revealed in 2018, saying the companies were punished "for illegally sharing access to customers' location information without consent and without taking reasonable measures to protect that information against unauthorized disclosure." Carriers challenged in three appeals courts, arguing that the fines violated their Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial. [...] While the Supreme Court is only taking up the AT&T and Verizon cases, the T-Mobile case would be affected by whatever ruling the Supreme Court issues. T-Mobile is seeking a rehearing in the District of Columbia Circuit, an effort that could be boosted or rendered moot by whatever the Supreme Court decides.



[1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/01/supreme-court-takes-case-that-could-strip-fcc-of-authority-to-issue-fines/

[2] https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ca2.3faa6ebe-fa32-ef11-a296-001dd804fa85/gov.uscourts.ca2.3faa6ebe-fa32-ef11-a296-001dd804fa85.96.0.pdf?ref=broadbandbreakfast.com

[3] https://yro.slashdot.org/story/25/09/11/2021243/court-rejects-verizon-claim-that-selling-location-data-without-consent-is-legal

[4] https://yro.slashdot.org/story/25/08/21/160246/t-mobile-claimed-selling-location-data-without-consent-is-legal---judges-disagree

[5] https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25/25-567/383709/20251106103552667_Verizon%20-%20Cert%20Petition%20and%20Appendix%20-%20To%20E-file.pdf

[6] https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/25/25-406/378534/20251002153212156_FCC%20v%20ATT%20Petition.pdf

[7] https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/010926zr_g2bh.pdf

[8] https://news.slashdot.org/story/24/04/29/1946256/fcc-fines-wireless-carriers-200-million-for-sharing-customer-data



What in the .... (Score:4, Interesting)

by kellin ( 28417 )

Stripping the FCC of being able to levy fines renders the department pointless.

Woohoo! PIRATE RADIO EVERYWHERE!

Good (Score:1, Informative)

by Anonymous Coward

The FCC is a regulatory agency, like the FDA, not a law-enforcement agency. If they want to fine people, they need to go through the same process any other person would to bring a grievance before a court. They can't just send "fines" in the mail.

Re: (Score:2)

by ArchieBunker ( 132337 )

So would the FCC send over a US Marshal to write a ticket?

Re: (Score:1)

by Anonymous Coward

> not a law-enforcement agency.

They aren't enforcing laws. WTF.

Ofc, the FCC is being singled out among the CFPB, CPSC, NHTSA, HUD, HHS, FEC, FTC, and the rest of the federal regulatory/licensing bodies. The FCC is being singled out while bribery is still in fashion, not because there's some sort of legal framework to support it. What's more, stripping this ability would further erode the ability to regulate other industries. If the FCC can't fine for violating their own statues, how long before the HHS c

Re: (Score:2)

by karmawarrior ( 311177 )

The FCC is whatever Congress says they are. Congress says they have the power to levy fines, just like the FAA, FTC, and lots of other similar agencies.

If Congress says that, and there's no constitutional issue (there isn't), SCOTUS can go fuck itself. It won't because it's been on a power kick lately, but that's yet another reason to fire SCOTUS when a sane administration is put in office.

It fits (Score:2)

by ArchieBunker ( 132337 )

Republicans have been working to strip regulatory agencies of their power for a few years now. These agencies irritate the mega corps and we certainly can't have that.

Re: (Score:2)

by hdyoung ( 5182939 )

US society is dumb enough to bring Trump back for a second round. At this point, I think that I approve of just about anything that sucks power away from the executive branch. I’m not sure if that makes me conservative, or liberal, or whatever. Our current admin makes the megacorps look benevolent. Power needs to shift back to the courts and the congress.

Law is pretty darn specific. (Score:5, Insightful)

by WolfgangVL ( 3494585 )

Title V of the Communications Act of 1934 provides the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) with the statutory authority to enforce its regulations through monetary penalties, criminal sanctions, and asset seizures.

Its as if our entire government has forgotten how our entire government is supposed to work.

If you don't like the law, you amend the law, or pass a new one. The current system of "Everybody with enough money appeal to the supreme court for exceptions" just erodes the law until only a couple of companies own everyth- Oh. I see. NM.

Re: (Score:1, Troll)

by ArchieBunker ( 132337 )

How are the new model Winnebagos? Asking for a supreme court buddy...

Re: Law is pretty darn specific. (Score:2)

by wgoodman ( 1109297 )

He drives a luxury coach. How dare you imply that a Winnie is good enough for him.

Re: (Score:2)

by Richard_at_work ( 517087 )

Looks like the laws been around for 92 years without being declared unconstitutional - I find it a bit ... odd that it could suddenly be declared unconstitutional, even after 92 years of being in force.

In other words, there should be a period of time after which it cant be challenged on constitutional grounds IMHO.

Only God can make random selections.