Supreme Court Rules 7-2 for Trump Administration in Political Ad Rate Dispute

The U.S. Supreme Court delivered a 7-2 ruling on September 4, 2023, siding with the Trump administration in a contentious dispute over discounted political advertising rates ahead of upcoming elections. The justices blocked a Fourth Circuit order that had demanded the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) resolve a challenge to its political advertising policy within 48 hours, upholding the agency’s discretion over timing in its decision-making process.

Background of the Political Ad Rate Dispute

The conflict centers on the FCC’s “lowest unit charge” rules, which require broadcasters to offer reduced advertising rates during the weeks leading up to elections. Federal law allows legally qualified candidates to access these discounted rates during the 45 days before a primary election and 60 days before a general election. However, in March, the FCC’s Media Bureau extended this discount to political parties involved in coordinated spending and certain joint fundraising committees that include noncandidate members.

Four Democratic candidates—Sherrod Brown, Jon Ossoff, Roy Cooper, and Kristen McDonald Rivet—challenged this extension. They argued that the statute limits the discount strictly to candidates themselves, not political parties or committees. The candidates sought a full FCC review of the guidance and simultaneously challenged it in court.

Legal Proceedings and Supreme Court Interventions

In August, a divided Fourth Circuit panel sided with the candidates, setting aside the FCC’s guidance and ruling that the discount is limited to candidates. However, the Supreme Court intervened on September 4 by staying that ruling, stating the Fourth Circuit likely lacked jurisdiction because the candidates had not waited for the FCC to complete its administrative review.

The Supreme Court emphasized that federal law requires the FCC to decide pending applications before courts can review them. The Court also noted the Fourth Circuit’s decision conflicted with rulings from other federal appeals courts. Despite the stay, the Fourth Circuit returned on October 7, ordering the FCC to make a final decision within 48 hours.

Supreme Court’s October 14 Decision and Reasoning

The FCC appealed again to the Supreme Court, which on October 14 blocked the Fourth Circuit’s order to expedite the decision. The Court described the writ of mandamus sought by the appeals court as a “drastic and extraordinary” remedy, unsuitable under the circumstances. It stated that while the Communications Act requires the FCC to act on applications, it does not impose a deadline on when the agency must act.

The Court wrote, “The Commission may exercise its discretion to set its own procedures and schedule for resolving such applications.” Forcing the FCC to issue a final decision within 48 hours, the Court said, would interfere improperly with the agency’s deliberative process and violate the separation of powers principle.

Additionally, the justices noted the FCC would suffer irreparable harm if forced to comply, as it would have to abandon its ongoing deliberations and prepare a final order on an unreasonably accelerated timetable.

Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, stating they would have denied the stay and allowed the Fourth Circuit’s order to stand, though neither provided a written dissent explaining their reasons.

Next Steps and Implications

The Supreme Court’s decision to stay the Fourth Circuit’s order means the FCC’s guidance on political advertising discounts remains in effect while the agency continues its review. The stay will remain as the Court considers whether to hear the full case. If the Court declines review, the stay will end automatically. If it agrees to hear the case, the stay will remain until a final judgment is issued.

Importantly, the ruling does not resolve the core legal question of whether political parties and joint fundraising committees are entitled to the lowest unit charge discount, leaving that issue for further adjudication.

The Supreme Court’s ruling marks a significant legal victory for the Trump administration, reinforcing the FCC’s authority and discretion in administering election-related advertising policies.