FCC v. AT&T (Seventh Amendment)

Send us Fan MailThe Supreme Court held that the FCC’s procedure for assessing monetary forfeitures against regulated entities does not violate the Seventh Amendment because the agency’s forfeiture orders do not themselves impose a legally enforceable obligation to pay and do not conclusively determine the facts underlying liability. Although the FCC may investigate alleged violations and issue forfeiture orders under 47 U.S.C. §503, payment can only be compelled through a separate enforcement action brought by the Department of Justice under §504, where the defendant is entitled to a de novo trial and a jury may make the ultimate factual determinations. Distinguishing its recent decision in SEC v. Jarkesy, where agency-imposed penalties were immediately enforceable without a jury determination, the Court emphasized that FCC forfeiture orders are merely preliminary steps that neither bind the recipient nor carry legal consequences absent a subsequent court proceeding. Because the statutory scheme preserves the opportunity for a jury trial before any enforceable obligation is imposed, the Court reversed the Fifth Circuit, which had found the scheme unconstitutional, and affirmed the Second Circuit, which upheld it. Support the show