October Term 2012 · Docket 11-1545
Does the FCC have final say on its own jurisdictional limits?
The City of Arlington disputes the FCC's interpretation of a statutory term. The agency claims this term defines its legal authority.
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
Goldstein argued the word jurisdiction has many meanings in different contexts.
Goldstein cited seventeen cases where the Court reviewed entry point questions de novo.
Verrilli argued the side that brought the case's central point cuts through most arguments.
Ginsburg noted the Commission has broad rule-making power to carry out the Act.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 7-23 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 7-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 30, lines 7-27 — Transcript, file page 30, lines 7-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 21-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 21-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 7-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 7-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 15-31 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 15-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 49-1 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 49-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 39-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 21-43 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 21-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 5-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 5-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 13-41 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 13-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 13-23 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 13-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 51-5 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 51-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 31-45 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 31-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 9-15 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 9-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 31-39 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 31-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 51-7 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 51-7
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The City of Arlington challenges the FCC's interpretation of a statute. The agency claims this interpretation defines its legal authority. The city argues courts must review this question independently.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 30, lines 7-27 — Transcript, file page 30, lines 7-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 21-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 21-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 39-11
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on January 16, 2013.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 7-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 7-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 13-41 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 13-41
What each side wants
The city wants a court to review the agency's interpretation of its own authority.
The agency wants a court to accept its interpretation of its own authority.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 30, lines 7-27 — Transcript, file page 30, lines 7-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 21-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 21-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 39-11
What each side says
The city argues courts must independently determine if an agency has legal authority.
The agency argues its interpretation of its own authority deserves judicial deference.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 30, lines 7-27 — Transcript, file page 30, lines 7-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 21-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 21-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 39-11
What the justices asked
Justice Ginsburg asked why the case is complicated if the agency interprets a phrase reasonably.
Justice Scalia asked if the side that brought the case means real jurisdiction when using that term.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 7-23 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 7-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 7-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 7-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 15-31 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 15-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 49-1 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 49-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 21-43 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 21-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 5-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 5-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 13-41 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 13-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 13-23 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 13-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 51-5 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 51-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 31-45 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 31-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 9-15 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 9-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 31-39 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 31-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 51-7 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 51-7
Why it matters
This case defines the boundary between agency power and judicial review. It determines how courts treat an agency's claim of legal authority. The outcome shapes the balance of power in administrative law.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 30, lines 7-27 — Transcript, file page 30, lines 7-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 21-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 21-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 39-11
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 7-23 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 7-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 7-19 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 7-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 15-31 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 15-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 49-1 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 49-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 21-43 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 21-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 5-19 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 5-19
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 60, lines 13-41 — Transcript, file page 60, lines 13-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 13-23 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 13-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 61, lines 51-5 — Transcript, file page 61, lines 51-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 31-45 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 31-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 9-15 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 9-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 21-25 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 21-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 31-39 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 31-39
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 43-45 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 43-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 51-7 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 51-7
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 30, lines 7-27 — Transcript, file page 30, lines 7-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 21-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 21-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 39-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 30, lines 7-27 — Transcript, file page 30, lines 7-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 21-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 21-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 39-11 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 39-11
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.