Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation | ||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Supreme Court of the United States | ||||||||||||||
Argued April 18 – 19, 1978 Decided July 3, 1978 |
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Holding | ||||||||||||||
Because of the pervasive nature of broadcasting, it has less First Amendment protection than other forms of communication. The F.C.C. was justified in concluding that Carlin's "Filthy Words" broadcast, though not obscene, was indecent, and subject to restriction. | ||||||||||||||
Court membership | ||||||||||||||
Chief Justice: Warren E. Burger Associate Justices: William J. Brennan, Jr., Potter Stewart, Byron White, Thurgood Marshall, Harry Blackmun, Lewis F. Powell, Jr., William Rehnquist, John Paul Stevens |
||||||||||||||
Case opinions | ||||||||||||||
Majority by: Stevens Joined by: Burger, Blackmun, Rehnquist, Powell Concurrence by: Powell Joined by: Blackmun Dissent by: Brennan Joined by: Marshall Dissent by: Stewart Joined by: Brennan, White, Marshall |
||||||||||||||
Laws applied | ||||||||||||||
U.S. Const. amend. I; |
Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726 (1978) is a landmark United States Supreme Court decision that defined the power of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) over "indecent" material as applied to broadcasting.
Contents |
[edit] Facts
In 1973, a father complained to the FCC that his son had heard the George Carlin routine "Filthy Words" broadcast one afternoon over WBAI, a Pacifica Foundation FM radio station in New York City. Pacifica received a sanction from the FCC, in the form of a letter of reprimand, for allegedly violating FCC regulations which prohibited broadcasting "indecent" material.
[edit] Holding
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the FCC action in 1978, by a vote of 5 to 4, ruling that the routine was "indecent but not obscene". The Court accepted as compelling the government's interests in 1) shielding children from patently offensive material, and 2) ensuring that unwanted speech does not enter one's home. The Court stated that the FCC had the authority to prohibit such broadcasts during hours when children were likely to be among the audience, and gave the FCC broad leeway to determine what constituted indecency in different contexts.
[edit] See also
- Seven dirty words (detailed account of the issue)
- List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 438
[edit] External links
- Text of the decision from the Electronic Frontier Foundation
- Text of the decision courtesy of FindLaw.
- Audio of the oral argument and decision
- First Amendment Library entry on FCC v. Pacifica Foundation
|