ALJ Halprin Won't Revoke Auburn Licenses
The Auburn Network’s broadcast licenses won’t be revoked over owner Michael Hubbard’s felony convictions, ruled FCC Administrative Law Judge Jane Halprin in an order Monday in docket 21-20 (see 2108310069). “No persuasive evidence has been introduced” to show that Hubbard’s…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
conviction for “public corruption felonies logically leads to the conclusion that he is likely to behave dishonestly” with the FCC, said Halprin. The proceeding was the first done via written record, rather than as a live, oral hearing, a method the agency authorized in 2020 to streamline the hearing process. A hearing designation order for Auburn was issued in February 2021 based on Hubbard’s convictions for multiple felonies for using his position in the Alabama state legislature to advance the interests of companies that paid Auburn as a consultant. The FCC Enforcement Bureau argued Hubbard sought to conceal his intermingling of legislative and business affairs by contracting his consulting services through Auburn, but Halprin said the EB failed to offer persuasive evidence that Hubbard was trying to hide. He asked state ethics officials about the matter, and Auburn has a record of compliance with FCC rules, she said. “The misdeeds of a public servant may indeed be relevant in gauging that person’s ability to serve the public interest as an FCC licensee, but in this particular case and under these particular circumstances, the evidence presented does not satisfy the burden of proof,” Halprin said. The Enforcement Bureau argued Auburn took advantage of the paper hearing process by submitting declarations about Hubbard’s character with its final filings in the case, preventing the EB from reviewing or challenging them. “We may still have some work to do in developing procedures for the consideration of evidentiary arguments in written hearing,” Halprin said.