Major networks challenge FCC broadcast indecency policy

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court on Monday stepped into a legal fight over the use of curse words on the airwaves, the high court’s first major case on broadcast indecency in 30 years.\nThe case concerns a Federal Communications Commission policy that allows for fines against broadcasters for so-called “fleeting expletives,” one-time uses of the F-word or its close cousins.\nFox Broadcasting Co., along with ABC, CBS and NBC, challenged the new policy after the commission said broadcasts of entertainment awards shows in 2002 and 2003 were indecent because of profanity uttered by Bono, Cher and Nicole Richie.\nA federal appeals court said the new policy was invalid and could violate the First Amendment.\nNo fines were issued in the incidents, but the FCC could impose fines for future violations of the policy.\nThe case before the court technically involves only two airings on Fox of the “Billboard Music Awards” in which celebrities’ expletives were broadcast over the airwaves.\nFCC Chairman Kevin Martin said Monday that he was pleased with the court’s decision.\n“The Commission, Congress and most importantly parents understand that protecting our children is our greatest responsibility,” he said in a prepared statement. “I continue to believe we have an obligation then to enforce laws restricting indecent language on television and radio when children are in the audience.”\nThe case will be argued in the fall.\nThe FCC appealed to the Supreme Court after the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York nullified the agency’s enforcement regime regarding “fleeting expletives.” By a 2-1 vote, the appeals court said the FCC had changed its policy and failed to adequately explain why it had done so.\nThe appeals court, acting on a complaint by the networks, nullified the policy until the agency could return with a better explanation for the change. In the same opinion, the court also said the agency’s position was probably unconstitutional.\nThe court rejected the FCC’s policy on procedural grounds, but was “skeptical that the commission can provide a reasoned explanation for its fleeting expletive regime that would pass constitutional muster.”\nSolicitor General Paul Clement, representing the FCC and the Bush administration, argued that the decision “places the commission in an untenable position,” powerless to stop the airing of expletives even when children are watching.\nThe FCC has pending before it “hundreds of thousands of complaints” regarding the broadcast of expletives, Clement said. He argued that the appeals court decision has left the agency “accountable for the coarsening of the airwaves while simultaneously denying it effective tools to address the problem.”\nThe appeal also argued that the FCC’s explanation of its policy was well reasoned and that the appeals court decision was at odds with the landmark 1978 indecency case, FCC v. Pacifica Foundation, the last broadcast indecency case heard by the Supreme Court.\nThe case will be argued in the fall.\nThe case is FCC v. Fox Television Stations, 07-582.