Talk America, Inc. v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co.
United States Supreme Court
131 S. Ct. 2254 (2011)
- Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD
Facts
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 required existing local telephone carriers to share their networks with competitors in two ways relevant here. First, existing providers must lease any elements of their networks that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) considers necessary to provide service to competitors at individual, “unbundled” cost-based rates. Second, existing carriers must provide “interconnection” between their networks and competitors’ so their customers can call each other. In 2005, the FCC issued a review order that said existing providers no longer had to provide cost-based access to “entrance facilities,” meaning wires or cables that connect existing carriers’ networks to competitors’. The FCC emphasized that the change would not impair competitors’ ability to provide services or alter interconnection rights. Shortly thereafter, Michigan Bell Telephone Company d/b/a AT&T Michigan (AT&T) (defendant) hiked its access rates. Talk America, Inc. and other competitors (plaintiffs) sued, alleging AT&T was abrogating their right to cost-based interconnection. The Michigan Public Service Commission agreed, but a federal district court reversed. On appeal, the FCC submitted amicus briefs interpreting its own regulations to support the competitors’ position. The Sixth Circuit declined to defer to the FCC’s interpretation and affirmed the ruling for AT&T. The Supreme Court granted review.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Thomas, J.)
Concurrence (Scalia, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 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.