| Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Supreme Court of the United States |
||||||
| Argued April 18–19, 1978 Decided July 3, 1978 |
||||||
| Full case name | Federal Communications Commission v. Pacifica Foundation, et al. | |||||
| Citations | 438 U.S. 726 (more) 98 S. Ct. 3026; 57 L. Ed. 2d 1073; 1978 U.S. LEXIS 135; 43 Rad. Reg. 2d (P & F) 493; 3 Media L. Rep. 2553 |
|||||
| Prior history | Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit | |||||
| Subsequent history | Rehearing denied, 439 U.S. 883 (October 2, 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 | ||||||
|
||||||
| Case opinions | ||||||
| Majority | Stevens, joined by Burger, Blackmun, Rehnquist, Powell | |||||
| Concurrence | Powell, joined by Blackmun | |||||
| Dissent | Brennan, joined by Marshall | |||||
| Dissent | Stewart, joined by Brennan, White, Marshall | |||||
| Laws applied | ||||||
| U.S. Const. amend. I; 18 U.S.C. § 1464 | ||||||
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. In July 2010, a Second Circuit decision effectively argued that the Pacifica Decision was outdated.
Contents |
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 censure from the FCC, in the form of a letter of reprimand, for allegedly violating FCC regulations which prohibited broadcasting indecent material.
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.
|
||||||||||||||