Opinion ID: 796874
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Relationship Between Sections 253(a) and 253(c)

Text: 9 Subsection (a), a rule of preemption, articulates a reasonably broad limitation on state and local governments' authority to regulate telecommunications providers. Subsection (c) begins with the phrase Nothing in this section affects and then enumerates various protected state and local government acts. Thus, section 253(a) states the general rule and section 253(c) provides the exception—a safe harbor functioning as an affirmative defense—to that rule. Id.; BellSouth Telecomms., Inc. v. Town of Palm Beach, 252 F.3d 1169, 1187 (11th Cir.2001). 10 We write on this point to make it clear that only after the party seeking preemption sustains its burden of showing that a local municipality has violated Section 253(a) by formally or effectively prohibiting entry into the [telecommunications services] market [does] the burden of proving that the regulation comes within the safe harbor in Section 253(c) fall[ ] on the defendant municipality. New Jersey Payphone, 299 F.3d at 240 (citation omitted). 11 We acknowledge that others disagree with our understanding of subsection (c)'s role in section 253. Level 3, in its amended complaint, correctly states that section 253(a) limits the ability of state and local governments to regulate, but then suggests that section 253(c) also limits the ability of state and local governments to regulate their rights-of-way or charge fair and reasonable compensation. In a broad sense this may be true, but only if the challenged regulation violates section 253(a). Further, the Sixth Circuit, in TCG Detroit v. City of Dearborn, 206 F.3d 618, 624 (6th Cir.2000), found that the challenged fee did not violate section 253(a), and then, nonetheless, proceeded to analyze the fee under section 253(c), despite that section's clear role as an exception to section 253(a)'s general rule. 12 We disagree with the approach taken by the Sixth Circuit because section 253(c) is not self-sustaining. The language of section 253(c) following the phrase Nothing in this section affects derives meaning only through its relationship to (a). BellSouth Telecomms., 252 F.3d at 1187-88. Indeed, section 253(c), standing alone, cannot form the basis of a cause of action against a state or local government. Id. at 1189. Thus, requiring proof of a violation of subsection (a) before moving to subsection (c) is the only interpretation supportable by a plain reading of the section as a whole. 13