Document: 351 U.S. 192 76 S.Ct. 763 100 L.Ed. 1081 UNITED STATES of America and Federal Communications Commission, Petitioners,v.STORER BROADCASTING COMPANY. No. 94. Argued Feb. 28, 29, 1956. Decided May 21, Mr.Warren E. Baker, for petitioner. Mr. Albert R. Connelly, New York City, respondent. Justice REED delivered the opinion Court. 1 The Commission issued, on August 19, 1948, a notice proposed rulemaking under authority 47 U.S.C. §§ 303(r), 311, 313 314, U.S.C.A. 313, 314 (Communications Act 1934, as amended, § 301 et seq., seq.). It was proposed, so far is pertinent to this case, amend Rules 3.35, 3.240 3.636 relating Multiple Ownership standard, FM television broadcast stations. Those rules provide that licenses broadcasting stations will not be granted if applicant, directly or indirectly, has an interest in other beyond limited number. purpose limitations avoid overconcentration facilities. 2 As required by 5 1003(b), permitted 'interested' parties file statements briefs. Such might also intervene appeals. 402(d) (e), 402(d, e). Respondent, licensee number radio stations, filed statement objecting changes, did interested broadcasters. Respondent based its objections largely fact allow one person hold many standard Storer argued such cause irreparable financial damage owners obsolescent station could augmented 3 In November 1953 entered order amending question without significant changes from forms.1 A review sought due course respondent Court Appeals District Columbia Circuit 1034, 1034,2 402(a), 402(a),3 1009(a), (c), 1009(a, c).4 alleged it owned controlled, within meaning Rules, seven radio, five asserted complained were conflict with statutory mandates applicants should public would served must have hearing before denial application. 309(a) (b), 309(a, b).5 claimed: 4 'The considering ownership (1%) per cent more voting stock corporation equivalent ownership, operation control station, are unreasonable bear no rational relationship national Anti-Trust policy.' This latter claim important because allegedly 20% scattered traded licensed dealers. thus control. 6 'party aggrieved' 'person suffering legal wrong' adversely affected several statutes authorize FCC action. See notes 2, 4, supra. stated injuries thus: 7 'Storer aggrieved Order adopted 25, 1953, that: 8 '(a) denied right full fair determine whether than (7) (5) light upon showing all material circumstances, thereby serve interest, convenience necessity. 9 '(b) acquisition Storer's circumstances Storer, may violative rules, result forfeiture now held resultant loss injury stockholders.' 10 On day amendments adopted, pending application additional at Miami dismissed basis Rules. 11 While respondent's appeal been raised either party Appeals, our jurisdiction mooted. considered. v. National Broadcasting Co., 319 239, 246, 63 1035, 1038, 87 1374. Jurisdiction depends standing seek ripeness. If rightfully adopting challenged regulations, await action disadvantage them, neither nor controversy. Under above-cited Code sections, any wrong action.6 12 We think had sue time exercised privilege. process complete. final agency action, 1001(c) (g), 1001(c, g), which claimed 'aggrieved.' When substantially same, we appellant who grant license competitor reduce own income against contention, admittedly sound, economic proper issue Commission. said: 13 'Congress some enacting section 402(b)(2). likely financially injured only having sufficient bring attention appellate court errors law granting license. power Congress confer prosecute appeal.' Comm'n Sanders Bros. Radio Station, 309 470, 477, 60 693, 698, 84 869. 14 added raise relevant respect order. 15 Again System United States, 316 407, 62 1194, 86 1563, considered problem then existing 48 Stat. 1093, Urgent Deficiencies Act, 38 219. CBS there adoption Chain Regulations Against contention regulations command do refrain doing anything, dissent 429, 1206, promulgating reviewable presently contractual relationships. 16 less their promulgation operate force deny cancel enough failure comply them penalizes licensees, appellant, whom they contract. administrative effect does cease merely certain institute proceedings enforce penalty incurred non-compliance.' Id., pages 417 418, page 1200. 17 said 'presently rights.' 421, 1202. 18 'Appellant's maintain present suit equity unaffected directed terms compel impose penalties act. that, setting controlling standards Commission's purport alter affect appellant's rights business relations whose applications rejected revoked.' 422, 19 American 347 284, 289, 74 593, 597, 98 699, EL Dorado Oil Works 328 12, 18—19, 66 843, 846, 90 1053. 20 here consideration aggrieve controls affairs Storer. Unless obtains modification declared policy, cannot enlarge seems, too, note Rule (n. 1, supra) endangers petition review. opinion, supra, 767 (b). hearings cogently plan future operations.7 moment purchase member endanger structure. These grievances restricting operations. legislation allowing actions, 21 prayed vacate provisions insofar applicant already allowable 'full hearing' interest.8 struck out, contrary (b) 5, supra), words italicized similar 3.35 3.240. case remanded directions eliminate these words. 95 U.S.App.D.C. 97, 220 F.2d 204. certiorari 350 816, 52. 22 asserts make gives limit concentration single control.9 argues go technical aspects validly give concreteness exist where meet those facts ascertain. shows permit waivers exceptions Rules.10 adds: 23 'This mean, course, mere filing waiver * necessarily require holding hearing, rule longer rule. means abuse discretion fail hear request showed, face, existence making inappropriate.' 24 defends position Appeals. urges 309, applicant. agree every shall his defense oral documentary evidence, submit rebuttal conduct cross-examination true disclosure facts. Cf. 1006(c), 1006(c). essential wise just boards agencies. 25 read requirement, however, withdrawing necessary orderly business. conceded 'Section 309(b) denying ways determined interest.'11 contain licensing specifically authorized statute. But authority. 154(i) 154(i), general inconsistent law. 26 like agencies, deals interest. Scripps-Howard 14, 875, 882, 1229. Its covers new rapidly developing fields. create regulation protection careful provision assure opportunity open competition use Accordingly, interpret barring declare intent consistent permissible 'concentration control.' but announces attitude concentration.12 whole appreciation responsibilities body charged efficient operation. growing complexity economy induced place businesses communication specialized agencies broad powers. Courts slow interfere conclusions when reconcilable directions.13 whole. An files knowledge toward 27 Co. 190, 997, 1344, prohibiting methods chain upheld despite caused 'examination written presented 308 309.' 230, 1016.14 validated numerous couched prohibitory language regulations. margin example.15 28 called necessity flexiblity involved. 'Commission provided 'networks given opportunity, facilities renewal licenses, call reasons why principle modified inapplicable." apge 207, 1005. 29 therefore bind itself inflexibly policies expressed Regulations. each comes still exercise ultimate judgment 'public convenience, necessity.' changing reveal interest' Regulations, assumed act accordance obligations.' 225, 1013. 30 That flexibility FCC's n. 10, providing reached presentation conforming 1.361(c) 1.702, set out adequate waived amended. whole, requires more. 309(b), applications. promulgated after extensive hearings, accompanying papers forth reasons, true, justify change intended waste state valid hearing. refusal, way open. 31 reverse remand consider 32 Reversed remanded. 33 DOUGLAS concurs result. 34 HARLAN, concurring part dissenting part. 35 properly deemed sua sponte entertain case,1 I am unable decision existed. my view, order' hence entitled invoke below dismiss lack jurisdiction. 36 1. not, constitute 'order' 1034. They simply establish followed powers; attach consequences inaction, questions status. quite unlike proceeding comparable one. reviewable, form 'order,' specific reason proscribed kinds contracts between licensees networks and, prescribing sanction cancellation noncompliance, operated coerce status networks' contracts. Of further being taken, network deterred entering into ones. coercive conduct, very characteristic led regard form, totally lacking here.2 37 2. second obstacle even shown 'aggrieved' them. assessing character grievance, put aside order, made simultaneously sixth direct days 402(b), System, 311 132, 61 152, 85 87, became conclusive it. Since reviewed, relief proceeding, prospective past application, complain. And show 39 review, 40 41 42 However allegations read, assert take pursuant revoke ever same token complete remedy through 402(b). Until applied it, Indeed, reach often difficult nature entitle complaining review; rare kind alleged. 43 said, 'now Storer,' absence allegation effect, mean exercises prudent judgment, account announced policy deciding apply No doubtt hat see told advance factors govern disposition able enlightened probabilities success obtaining 44 3. So clear fact, issuance Court's premised themselves, knowing valid. procedure converted something different—namely, declaratory validity Not statute, were. 45 orders contemplated 1034 seems clear. authorizes 'final,' instance 'by' itself. 'order'; 'final' since taken affected; any, Moreover, apart obstacles, inappropriate anticipatory equitable relief. requires, example, petitions issued. limitation clearly appropriate suffered, justification limiting availability Why threat becomes imminent, immediately while later acquire greater interest? Finally, apparent procedures judgments adequate; construe alternative produces incongruous authorizing issued thereafter. 46 place, construed relief, usual requirements invoking applicable ordinary predecessor arose. CBS's expressly suffer—the wholesale concellation licensees—before remedy. abandoned, can here, alleges threatened kind, possibility appeal. however—again support Storer—that 'cannot operations' unless advised plans expansion communications always subject contingency refuse reasons. different issued: account, among contingencies, likelihood What argument down to, therefore, needs know can, need is, suffered postponed until applies expense unsuccessful applicants. today, thought reject Declaratory persons risk both dismissal employment imposition criminal penalties, Public Workers (C.I.O.) Mitchell, 330 75, 67 556, 91 754, yet relieve burden license.3 4. today amounts this: duty reviewed injury, settle never occur disclosed primary reliance CBS,4 view fails conclusion persuasive, controlling, precisely opposite result.5 implications undermine much settled reviewability unfortunate benefit briefs parties. concur opinion. 49 decided, jurisdiction, merits. 50 FRANKFURTER, dissenting. 51 amendatory Brother HARLAN'S reasoning convinces me record us section. Therefore entertained 52 Procedural jurisdictional judicial federal courts playthings lawyers obstructions road justice. Whether formulated Constitution, congressional enactments precedents, designed keep limits according depend impact individual case. To sure, dealing standards, differences views regarding scope applicability bound arise time. Who turns context, confused dubious, particular raises issues judges unnaturally divide, unmathematical problems Singer & Sons Union Pacific 295, 254, 198. 53 laity matters seem technicalities derogatory sense term. phase mind thinks ill accord private wishes. informed adviser carry desires encounter 'technical difficulties,' strenuous President States impatiently observed 'all technicality.' professionally competent officials times impatient decisions adjudicate substantive sought. important, minimize function adjudication expressing There are, exceptional situations dissenter merits majority theCourt removes threshold e.g., Ashwander Tennessee Valley Authority, 297 288, 341, 56 466, 480, 80 688. Section illustrate problem: ownership. (a) (including common control) if: '(1) indirectly owns, operates, another serves area; '(2) party, stockholder, officer director controls, in, manner determining control, reference size, extent location areas served, people competitive service question. event stockholders, officers directors indirect officers, of, stations.'* (The three Rules.) 'In applying paragraph stockholders outstanding stock.' CFR, Rev. 1953. seven. 'Any chapter may, sixty entry appeals, wherein venue prescribed 1033 title lies, *' Any enjoin, aside, annul, suspend (except appealable subsection section) brought 19A Title 5.' 'Except (1) preclude (2) committed discretion— lelevant thereof. '(c) Every statute 309: 'Examination; examination find thereof, 'Notification denial; contents; reply; hearing; intervention. finding specified section, forthwith notify known grounds inability finding. Following notice, reply. reply, formally designate specifying particularity things *. subsequently participate introduction evidence well proof issues, applicant.' Legal wrong, ground appeal, introduced Administrative Procedure 10(a). 243. explanation reports Senate, 752, 79th Cong., 1st Sess. 26, House, 1980, 2d 42, define 'legal wrong': phrase 10(e). adverse personal prevail—that illegal effect.' 10(e) bill reviewing 'hold unlawful (3) right.' language. 1009(e), 1009(e). Frozen Food Express 40, 44, 569, 571. attacked 1% appears 3.636, passed leaves portion unaffected. cross certiorari, leave validity. perform acts, orders, chapter, execution function.' 154(i). otherwise time, shall— '(f) Make deem prevent interference chapter: '(r) prescribe restrictions conditions, law, *.' 303, 303. Rev.1953, 1.361(c): Applications which, rule, regulation, requirement involved, patently defective accompanied exception conflict. requests desired thereof.' 1.702: 'Petition amendment rules. issuance, amendment, repeal regulation. text change, petition.' also, 1941 Supp., 1.72, 1.81. 310 310, 311. Ashbacker Corp. 326 327, 333, 9, 148, 151, 108; 1.724; Felman 339 973, 70 1030, 94 1379; 699. 196, 1000. last Term determination improper appraisal Allentown 349 358, 363—364, 75 855, 858, 859, 99 1147. Unemployment Compensation Territory Alaska Aragan, 329 143, 153, 245, 250, 136; O'Leary Brown-Pacific-Maxon, 340 504, 508, 71 472. Point III Company brief matter heading, Cannot Escape Duty Evaluate Decide Each License Application Own Facts.' At provision. read: 'Sec. 309. renewal, thereof thereto, fix thereon, afford heard prescribe.' 1085. Change certainty clarification arbitrary S.Rep. 82d 8. "No contract, arrangement, understanding, express implied, organization prevented hindered from, penalized for, programs organization." 200, 1002; 3.101. Although doubt sponte, goes 1374; Rochester Telephone 307 125, 128, 3, 59 756, 83 1147; Federation Labor Relations Board, 401, 404, 300, 301, 347. December 1950, 64 1129, 1031—1042, 1031—1042. 1032, confers provides 'Such invoked 1034.' turn, appeals order.' short, court's Insofar revocation maximum arguably forbidding pain revocation, engage transactions violate numerical limitations. complaining, deterrent allege buy sell licensee. objects control—and, hypothesis, regulations—purchase stock. allegations, 773, infra. recent East Texas Motor Freight Lines, Inc., Express, 49, 574, here. interpretation Interstate Commerce Act—sought interpretative Act—was justified imposed violations substantial investments operations enjoined here; prosecutions condition precedent danger prior cases cited Court, involved stituation, noted Throughout emphasized immediate distinguished sort See, 424—425, 1203, 1204: 'We stop discuss great variety rulings one, legislatively, remedies pursued resorting remedies, occasion resort remedies. discriminate peculiar elements prerequisite present. test found overrefined technique, protect adjudications follow, results

Category: 7