skip navigation
search

Search the opinions of the US Supreme Court

Search for:
All decisions
Only decisions since 1991
Only summaries of decisions
Only historic decisions
use and, or, not -- and is default
* acts as wildcard, phrases in "double quotes"

Did you mean FCC?

Your query fcc returned 34 results.

1000 VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC. V. FCC
[Syllabus]
The Federal Communications Commission can require state utility commissions to set the rates charged for leased telecommunications network elements on a forward-looking basis untied to the network owners' investment, and can require those owners to combine such elements upon the request of a leasing competitor that cannot do the combining itself.
1000 FCC V. AT&T INC.
[Syllabus]
1000 METRO BROADCASTING, INC. V. FCC, 497 U.S. 547 (1990)
[Syllabus]
1000 FCC V. NEXTWAVE PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS INC.
[Syllabus]
Section 525 of the Bankruptcy Code prohibits the Federal Communications Commission from revoking licenses held by a bankruptcy debtor upon the debtor's failure to make timely payments to the FCC for purchase of the licenses.
1000 FCC V. FOX TELEVISION STATIONS, INC.
[Syllabus]
1000 METRO BROADCASTING, INC. V. FCC, 497 U.S. 547 (1990)
[Syllabus]
904 VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC. V. FCC
[Syllabus]
The Federal Communications Commission can require state utility commissions to set the rates charged for leased telecommunications network elements on a forward-looking basis untied to the network owners' investment, and can require those owners to combine such elements upon the request of a leasing competitor that cannot do the combining itself.
883 FCC V. NEXTWAVE PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS INC.
[Syllabus]
Section 525 of the Bankruptcy Code prohibits the Federal Communications Commission from revoking licenses held by a bankruptcy debtor upon the debtor's failure to make timely payments to the FCC for purchase of the licenses.
798 FCC V. FOX TELEVISION STATIONS, INC.
[Syllabus]
785 NATIONAL CABLE & TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSN.,INC. V. GULF POWER CO.
[Syllabus]
The Pole Attachments Act authorizes the Federal Communications Commission to regulate the rates that utilities charge for attachments providing high-speed Internet access at the same time as cable television and for attachments providing wireless telecommunications.
752 AT&T CORP. V. IOWA UTILITIES BD., 525 U.S. 366 (1999)
[Syllabus]
752 TALK AMERICA, INC. V. MICHIGAN BELLTELEPHONE CO.
[Syllabus]
673 FCC V. AT&T INC.
[Syllabus]
562 DENVER AREA EDUCATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS CONSORTIUM, INC,., ET AL. V. F.C.C., 518 U.S. 727 (1996)
[Syllabus]
562 GLOBAL CROSSING TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. V.METROPHONES TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC.
[Syllabus]
527 MCCONNELL V. FEDERAL ELECTION COMMíN
[Syllabus]
434 RENO V. AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, 117 S.CT. 2329, 138 L.ED.2D 874 (1997)
[Syllabus]
434 NIXON V. MISSOURI MUNICIPAL LEAGUE
[Syllabus]
Whether 47 U.S.C. 253(a), which provides that "[n]o State ... regulation ... may prohibit ... the ability of any entity to provide any interstate or intrastate telecommunications service," preempts a state law prohibiting political subdivisions of the state from offering telecommunications service to the public?
374
[Syllabus]
374 VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC. V. LAW OFFICESOF CURTIS V. TRINKO, LLP
[Syllabus]
1. Whether allegations of inadequacies in a monopolist's affirmative assistance to its rivals, including resellers‚ÄĒas newly provided by incumbent local telephone companies under the Telecommunications Act of 1996‚ÄĒstate a claim for unlawful unilateral predatory conduct under Section 2 of the Sherman Act 2. Whether antitrust and Communications Act standing extends to indirect purchasers, I.e., the customers of the defendant's customer, asserting injuries wholly derivative of the direct customer's injury, even when invoking only the direct customer's legal rights.
374 GREATER NEW ORLEANS BROADCASTING ASSN., INC.V. UNITED STATES
[Syllabus]
296 AMERICAN TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH CO. V. CENTRAL OFFICE TELEPHONE, INC., 524 U.S. 214 (1998)
[Syllabus]
187 VERIZON MD. INC. V. PUBLIC SERV. COMMíN OF MD.
[Syllabus]
Title 28 U. S. C. §1331 provides a basis for federal-court jurisdiction over a telecommunication carrier's claim that a state public utility commission's order requiring reciprocal compensation for telephone calls to Internet service providers is pre-empted by federal law; the doctrine of Ex parte Young, 209 U. S. 123, permits the suit to go forward against the state commissioners in their official capacities.
187 FEDERAL ELECTION COMM'N V. AKINS, 524 U.S. 11 (1998)
[Syllabus]
187 TRAVELERS CASUALTY & SURETY CO. OF AMERICA V.PACIFIC GAS & ELEC. CO.
[Syllabus]
187 HURLEY V. IRISH-AMERICAN GAY, LESBIAN & BISEXUAL GROUP OF BOSTON, 515 U.S. 557 (1995)
[Syllabus]
187 UNITED STATES V. BOOKER
[Syllabus]
187 NKEN V. HOLDER
[Syllabus]
187 ASHCROFT V. FREE SPEECH COALITION
[Syllabus]
Provisions of the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 prohibiting "any visual depiction" that "is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct," as well as any sexually explicit image "advertised, promoted, presented, described, or distributed in such a manner that conveys the impression" it depicts a minor engaging in such conduct, are overbroad and therefore violate the First Amendment.
187 ADARAND CONSTRUCTORS V. PENA, 515 U.S. 200 (1995).
[Syllabus]
187 SORRELL V. IMS HEALTH INC.
[Syllabus]
187
[Syllabus]
187 TURNER BROADCASTING SYSTEM, INC. V. F.C.C., 520 U.S. 180 (1997)
[Syllabus]
187 UNITED STATES V. PLAYBOY ENTERTAINMENTGROUP, INC.
[Syllabus]
1. Whether Section 505 violates the First Amendment. 2. Whether the three-judge district court was divested of jurisdiction to dispose of the government's post- judgment motions under Rule 59 (e) and 60 (a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by the government's filing of a notice of appeal while those motion were pending.
187 NATIONAL CABLE & TELECOMMUNICATIONS ASSN. V.BRAND X INTERNET SERVICES
[Syllabus]
187 ERIE V. PAPíS A. M.
[Syllabus]
Did the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, the court of last resort of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, improperly strike an ordinance of the City of Erie which fully comports with the principles articulated in Barnes v. Glen Theatre, Inc., thereby willfully disregarding binding precedent in violation of the Supremacy Clause at Article VI, Clause 2 of the Constitution of the United States?
187
[Syllabus]
187 PARENTS INVOLVED IN COMMUNITY SCHOOLS V.SEATTLE SCHOOL DIST. NO. 1
[Syllabus]
187 ELDRED V. ASHCROFT
[Syllabus]
The Copyright Term Extension Act, which enlarges the duration of existing and future copyrights by 20 years, does not exceed Congress' power under the Constitution's Copyright Clause and does not violate the First Amendment.