roundtable: Alliance v. FCC to Supreme Court

roundtable: Alliance v. FCC to Supreme Court

Alliance v. FCC to Supreme Court

AllianceCM@aol.com
Mon, 13 Nov 1995 17:34:15 -0500 

Date: Mon, 13 Nov 1995 17:34:15 -0500
From: AllianceCM@aol.com
Message-Id: <951113173414_105502901@emout04.mail.aol.com>
To: alliance-nw@isu.edu, communet@uvmvm.uvm.edu, telecomreg@relay.adp.wisc.edu,
Subject: Alliance v. FCC to Supreme Court


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE	: November 13, 1995	
CONTACT: BARRY FORBES (202) 393-2650

SUPREME COURT TO REVIEW ALLIANCE FOR COMMUNITY MEDIA LEGAL CHALLENGE TO 
CABLE CENSORSHIP STATUTE

Washington, D.C. -- The U.S. Supreme Court announced today that it will
review the constitutionality of a 1992 law authorizing cable company
censorship of some types of constitutionally-protected speech on some 
cable television access channels.  The case, Alliance for Community 
Media et al. v. Federal Communications Commission (FCC),  involves the 
named petitioner, along with co-petitioners Alliance for Communications 
Democracy and People for the American Way.  The case will be decided in 
conjunction with a companion case also brought against the FCC by the 
'90s Channel and the American Civil Liberties Union

Barry Forbes, Executive Director of the Alliance for Community Media, 
stated, "The very idea of the government authorizing cable TV operators 
to regulate the content of public access channels is ludicrous! More 
than likely, the cable TV operators would nix programs that merely hint 
at being controversial. We believe programming should be held to 
community standards as determined by the courts -- and we're delighted 
the Supreme Court has chosen to review this important government 
censorship case."

The Alliance and the co-petitioners are appealing the June 6, 1995 
decision of the full D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in Alliance for 
Community Media et al. v. FCC (56 F.3d 105). The Supreme Court will be 
reviewing a section of the 1992 Cable Act that stems from a last-minute 
Senate floor amendment.

The section under challenge enables the operator of a cable television 
system to prohibit programming on public, educational or governmental 
access cable channels (commonly referred to as "PEG access") based on 
content.  Affected programming could include programs on the AIDS/HIV 
epidemic, abortion, childbirth, art censorship, and civil disobedience.

As written, the 1992 statute allows a cable operator to suppress 
programming which contains  so-called "indecent" material, or material 
soliciting or promoting unlawful conduct.  Also being challenged are 
1993 FCC regulations implementing the statute.

"This case has enormous implications, not only for the content of 
television programming, but for freedom of expression and the right of 
privacy on any electronic medium which the federal government attempts 
to regulate," stated Forbes.  "An adverse decision could expand the 
rights of the government to decide what people can say and what viewers 
can see over the cable medium."

Originally, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals 
found that the 1992 provision violated the First Amendment, which probits
government interference with free expression and communication.  The 
initial opinion would have struck down the provision, and consequently 
prohibited operators of cable television systems from censoring any 
materials protected by the First Amendment. However, the FCC asked for 
and received a rehearing by the entire appeals court for of the District 
of Columbia circuit.  The eleven-member court overturned the previous 
panel's determination, holding that any censorship that might occur on 
PEG and leased access channels would be a legitimate exercise of 
editorial discretion by the cable operator, incidental to its proprietary 
rights.  Because, according to the court, the actions would be those of 
private entities against other private entities, the censorship would not 
be subject to the same level of judicial scrutiny under the First 
Amendment as direct government censorship.

"We believe that the D.C. Circuit dismissed the First Amendment 
jurisprudence on 'state action' and 'public forum,' doctrines," stated 
Forbes. "The earlier decision missed the point that public and leased 
access channels were created as public fora by federal, state and local 
laws.  As government-created entities, they should be subject to the 
most rigorous First Amendment protections.  We're pleased that the 
Supreme Court will give us an opportunity to settle this important 
point."  

The law firm of Shea & Gardner, which represented the Alliance 
petitioners before the FCC and in both phases of the D.C. Circuit 
proceedings, will continue its pro-bono services to the Alliance and 
co-plaintiffs. Representation will also be provided by staff attorneys 
at People for the American Way and the Media Access Project.

The Alliance for Community Media is a national, non-profit membership 
organization committed to assuring everyone's access to electronic 
media. The Alliance accomplishes this by disseminating public 
information, advancing a positive legislative and regulatory environment, 
building coalitions, and supporting local organizing. Founded in 1976, 
the Alliance represents the interests of over 950 public, educational 
and governmental ("PEG") access organizations and local origination 
cable services throughout the country. The Alliance also represents 
the interests of local religious, community, charitable and other 
organizations throughout the country who utilize PEG access channels 
and facilities to speak to their memberships and their larger communities.

                                    -- 30 --

_________________________________________________
Alliance for Community Media
666 11th Street, NW, Suite 806, Washington, DC 20001-4542
Voice:	(202) 393-2650
Fax:		(202) 393-2653
"Ensuring everyone's access to electronic media
since 1976."

Barry Forbes, Executive Director
"Do what's right. Do it right. Do it right now."
_________________________________________________

[CNI Home Page]