October Term 2002 · Docket 01-653
Can bankruptcy courts override FCC spectrum license revocations?
The FCC argues bankruptcy courts cannot void its public interest license decisions. NextWave claims the Bankruptcy Code protects its reorganization rights.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
General Clement argued the FCC must allocate spectrum for the public interest. He stated auctions assign spectrum to the most effective users.
Mr. Franklin argued the Bankruptcy Code permits overriding FCC determinations. He claimed this allows bankrupt companies to retain specific assets.
Mr. Verrilli argued the FCC revoked licenses solely due to deferred payments. He stated this action occurred while NextWave reorganized in bankruptcy.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 39-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 31-69 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 31-69
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 19-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 19-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 5-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 5-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 46, lines 29-11 — Transcript, file page 46, lines 29-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 17-1 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 17-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 15-19 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 15-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 27-29 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 27-29
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The dispute centers on whether federal bankruptcy law supersedes FCC regulatory authority. The FCC asserts its power to revoke licenses based on public interest. NextWave argues bankruptcy protections shield its assets during reorganization.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 39-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 31-69 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 31-69
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 19-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 19-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 46, lines 29-11 — Transcript, file page 46, lines 29-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 17-1 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 17-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 15-19 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 15-19
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 8, 2002.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 5-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 5-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 27-29 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 27-29
What each side wants
The FCC wants the Court to uphold its license revocation. It seeks to prevent bankruptcy courts from overriding public interest decisions.
NextWave wants the Court to protect its bankruptcy reorganization. It seeks to keep its spectrum licenses during the process.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 39-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 31-69 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 31-69
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 19-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 19-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 46, lines 29-11 — Transcript, file page 46, lines 29-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 17-1 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 17-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 15-19 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 15-19
What each side says
The FCC argues Congress directed it to allocate spectrum for the public interest. It claims bankruptcy judges cannot override this regulatory determination.
NextWave argues the Bankruptcy Code permits it to defer payments. It claims this protection allows it to retain licenses during reorganization.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 39-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 31-69 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 31-69
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 19-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 19-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 46, lines 29-11 — Transcript, file page 46, lines 29-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 17-1 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 17-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 15-19 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 15-19
What the justices asked
Chief Justice Rehnquist asked if the case was submitted. He concluded the oral argument session.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 27-29 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 27-29
Why it matters
This case defines the boundary between bankruptcy law and federal regulation. It determines whether agencies can enforce public interest standards against bankrupt entities. The outcome shapes how spectrum licenses are protected during financial distress.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 39-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 31-69 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 31-69
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 19-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 19-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 46, lines 29-11 — Transcript, file page 46, lines 29-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 17-1 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 17-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 15-19 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 15-19
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 5-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 5-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 27-29 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 27-29
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 39-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 31-69 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 31-69
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 19-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 19-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 46, lines 29-11 — Transcript, file page 46, lines 29-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 17-1 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 17-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 15-19 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 15-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 39-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 31-69 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 31-69
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 19-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 19-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 46, lines 29-11 — Transcript, file page 46, lines 29-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 50, lines 17-1 — Transcript, file page 50, lines 17-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 15-19 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 15-19
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.