FCC and Other Defendants Urge Dismissal of Standard General's Racial Animus Suit
The FCC and other parties that Standard General and founder Soohyung Kim accuse of participating in a racist conspiracy to torpedo the company's $8.6 billion purchase of Tegna (see 2404250059) are urging dismissal of Standard's suit. Multiple defendants argued in motions to dismiss Monday that Standard's suit before the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia is in the wrong court. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in April denied a Standard/Tegna petition for writ of mandamus aimed at pushing the FCC to move on review and approval of the deal (see 2304210058).
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.
The idea that racial animus drove the FCC Media Bureau's referral of the Standard broadcast license transfer applications to the agency's administrative law judge for hearing is largely based on speculation or statements that others made to the commission, the agency said in its motion to dismiss (docket 1:24-cv-01204). It said Standard and Kim provide no facts that support a plausible inference of racial discrimination. As such, the complaint "is a thinly veiled attempt to impermissibly challenge agency action in District Court, which lacks jurisdiction over such claims," the FCC said.
Allen Media CEO Byron Allen said Standard's business practices result in lost jobs and undermine local journalism, and as a result "many were not happy about the proposed deal." He said that while Standard alleges deal opponents were secretly doing the bidding of Allen Media because the FCC prefers black media ownership to Asian, none of Standard's allegations against Allen Media is a cognizable claim. Federal district courts lack jurisdiction to hear claims about the validity of FCC decisions to not approve license applications, or to determine whether the agency unreasonably delayed issuing a formal decision, he said.
Standard's suit, Dish Network said, "is nothing more than an expensive temper tantrum thrown by an entitled entrepreneur who is irate over the fact that [the FCC] did not give him exactly what he wanted exactly when he wanted it." In addition, the D.C. Circuit is the proper venue for challenging the FCC's hearing designation, it said. Parties that didn't support the acquisition "had genuine concerns about the proposed transaction’s impact on pay-television fees and local news coverage."
Racist conspiracy allegations are "the stuff of online message boards and social media rants, not a federal court complaint," Common Cause said, also arguing courts of appeals have exclusive jurisdiction to review FCC orders. The Communications Workers of America's NewsGuild and National Association of Broadcast Employees and Technicans said racial animus arguments against the unions' objections to the proposed deal are "inflammatory" and the complaint "is instead riddled with improper 'information and belief' allegations."
Many parties also argued their objection to Standard/Tegna is protected political speech. "If this case is allowed to go forward, then no lawyer, consultant, or lobbyist working in Washington, D.C. or any state capital should consider themselves safe, said David Goodfriend, a lawyer and lobbyist who represented the CWA unions. United Church of Christ's Media Justice Ministry said some Standard allegations "tacitly admit that [UCC] exercised its First Amendment Right to petition to government, not just in this instance, but in many others over a span of decades where UCC Media Justice sought to protect the public interest based on similar concerns regarding localism and consumer costs, just as it did as to this transaction. "