FCC: D.C. Circuit Doesn't Have Jurisdiction Over Standard/Tegna HDO
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit should dismiss the Standard/Tegna appeal because it doesn’t have jurisdiction over the case, the FCC said in a motion to dismiss and response filed Thursday. “This Court lacks jurisdiction over the…
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.
Hearing Designation Order because it does not constitute final Commission action,” the agency said. Similar arguments were made by the deal's union and public interest group opponents. The court on Thursday approved those opponents as intervenors in the case. The lack of jurisdiction is also why “there is no good reason for the Court to consolidate or expedite the appeal,” the FCC said. The HDO isn’t a final order because it was issued at the bureau level rather than after a commissioners' vote, the FCC said. The HDO also doesn’t come to any conclusions -- unlike most HDOs, the Standard/Tegna order doesn’t require the FCC’s administrative law judge to issue a decision, it only directs the ALJ to hold an inquiry and then report back to the Media Bureau. “Such ‘merely investigatory’ agency action is ‘not final agency action’ because ‘the agency has not yet made any determination or issued any order imposing any obligation,’” said the FCC. The broadcasters haven’t provided any evidence as to why they can’t extend the financing on their transaction past the May 22 final extension date, said intervenors Common Cause, the United Church of Christ Media Justice Ministry, and the Communications Workers of America's NewsGuild and National Association of Broadcast Engineers and Technicians sectors. The court should “disregard” the argument that financing will be lost because allowing it could set a “dangerous precedent,” the intervenors said. “Going forward, applicants before the FCC and other agencies could simply set arbitrary deadlines for agency action.” May 22 “is a deadline of appellants’ own making,” said the FCC. “At this juncture, any decision by appellants not to proceed with the proposed transaction would be their own private business decision, not the result of a regulatory directive from the agency.” The intervenors also faulted Standard/Tegna for hurrying the court and FCC to act while asking the FCC to block union attorneys from accessing information on the case. "Appellants have not come to Court with clean hands,” said the intervenor filing.