October Term 2008 · Docket 07-582
Does the FCC have authority to ban fleeting expletives on broadcast TV?
Fox Television Stations challenges the FCC's decision to fine it for brief profanity during live sports broadcasts.
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 Garre argued the FCC acted to fulfill its statutory mandate to protect children from indecent content.
He cited the Commission's acknowledgment of a policy change in the relevant order to support the agency's position.
Justice Stevens questioned whether the specific word in question carries a sexual connotation in all contexts.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 31-35 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 31-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 23-29 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 23-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 3-9 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 3-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 51-23 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 51-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 21-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 21-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 23-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 23-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-19 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 25-31 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 25-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 35-23 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 35-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 35-9 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 35-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 33-39 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 33-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 45-49 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 45-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 21-35 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 21-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 7-13 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 7-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 35-51 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 35-51
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The FCC seeks to enforce stricter rules against indecent language on television. Fox argues the agency acted arbitrarily by changing its enforcement stance without clear notice.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 51-23 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 51-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 21-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 21-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 23-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 23-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 35-23 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 35-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 35-9 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 35-9
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 4, 2008.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-19 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 45-47
What each side wants
The FCC wants the Court to uphold its authority to fine broadcasters for fleeting expletives.
Fox wants the Court to strike down the fines as arbitrary and inconsistent with prior agency policy.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 51-23 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 51-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 21-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 21-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 23-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 23-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 35-23 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 35-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 35-9 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 35-9
What each side says
The FCC argues it has statutory power to protect children from indecent material during prime viewing hours.
Fox argues the FCC changed its enforcement policy without proper notice, violating due process principles.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 51-23 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 51-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 21-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 21-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 23-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 23-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 35-23 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 35-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 35-9 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 35-9
What the justices asked
Justice Scalia asked whether the FCC actually changed its policy or merely clarified an existing one.
Justice Ginsburg asked if the new policy targets only two specific words or a broader list of terms.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 31-35 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 31-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 23-29 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 23-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 3-9 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 3-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 25-31 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 25-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 33-39 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 33-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 45-49 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 45-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 21-35 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 21-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 7-13 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 7-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 35-51 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 35-51
Why it matters
This case defines the limits of government power to regulate speech in the home. It determines whether broadcasters face strict liability for brief, accidental profanity during live events. The outcome shapes the balance between parental protection and free expression on television.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 51-23 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 51-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 21-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 21-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 23-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 23-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 35-23 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 35-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 35-9 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 35-9
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 10, lines 29-35 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 29-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 9-19 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 9-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 31-35 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 31-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 23-29 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 23-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 3-9 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 3-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-19 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 25-31 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 25-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 33-39 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 33-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 45-49 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 45-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 45-47 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 45-47
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 21-35 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 21-35
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 7-13 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 7-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 35-51 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 35-51
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 28, lines 51-23 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 51-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 21-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 21-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 23-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 23-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 35-23 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 35-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 35-9 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 35-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 28, lines 51-23 — Transcript, file page 28, lines 51-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 21-21 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 21-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 23-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 23-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 35-23 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 35-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 35-9 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 35-9
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.