Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Action for Children’s Television v. Federal Communications Commission

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
564 F.2d 458 (D.C. Cir. 1977)


Facts

The public-interest group Action for Children’s Television (ACT) (plaintiff) proposed rules for improving children’s television that included imposing restrictions on commercials. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) (defendant) published notice of ACT’s proposal, accepted written comments over a long period of time, and held informal panel discussions and oral arguments on the proposal. However, the FCC ultimately declined to adopt ACT’s proposal. Instead, the FCC adopted a final report and final rules that followed a proposal made by industry representative National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) permitting the television industry to use self-regulation to control the use of commercials in children’s programming. Historically, the FCC had permitted the industry to self-regulate in the area of programming. Also, publicly available records from prior NAB proposals reflected NAB’s advocacy for self-regulation within the industry. ACT petitioned for review in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, arguing that the FCC’s adoption of NAB’s self-regulation proposal represented an abuse of the informal-rulemaking process, because the proposal was negotiated in secret and was not subject to public comment.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Tamm, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 175,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.