Document: 544 U.S. 113 CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES ET AL.v.ABRAMS No. 03-1601. Supreme Court of United States. Argued January 19, 2005. Decided March 22, After petitioner City denied respondent Abrams permission to construct a radio tower on his property, he filed this action seeking, inter alia, injunctive relief under § 332(c)(7)(B)(v) the Communications Act 1934, 47 U. S. C. 332(c)(7), as added by Telecommunications 1996 (TCA), and money damages 42 1983. Section 332(c)(7) imposes specific limitations traditional authority state local governments regulate location, construction, modification wireless communications facilities, provides, in 332(c)(7)(B)(v), that anyone "adversely affected any final ... [such] government may commence an court competent jurisdiction." The District held provided exclusive remedy for City's actions and, accordingly, ordered grant respondent's application conditional-use permit, but refused request Ninth Circuit reversed latter point. Held: An individual not enforce 332(c)(7)'s zoning through 1983 action. TCA — providing judicial different from itself precluded resort Pp. 119-127. (a) Even after plaintiff demonstrates federal statute creates individually enforceable right class beneficiaries which belongs, see Gonzaga Univ. v. Doe, 536 273, 285, defendant rebut presumption is by, showing contrary congressional intent statute's creation "comprehensive remedial scheme inconsistent with enforcement 1983," Blessing Freestone, 520 329, 341. Court's cases demonstrate provision express, private means redress ordinarily indication Congress did intend leave open 119-120. (b) could have meant expressly authorized coexist alternative available 1983, since former would distort expedited review limited remedies created 332(c)(7)(B)(v). adds no those limits ways does not. In contrast action, must be sought within 30 days governmental entity has taken "final action," once filed, "hear decide" it "on basis." Moreover, unlike remedies, perhaps do include compensatory damages, certainly attorney's fees costs. rejects Abrams's arguments borrowing 332(c)(7)(B)(v)'s 30-day period, rather than applying longer 1988 or 28 1658, asserting 332(c)(7)(B) violations. 120-125. (c) concluding intended permit plaintiffs proceed misinterpreted TCA's so-called "saving clause," provides: "This shall construed impair Federal law." Construing does, create rights enforced only express remedy, "impair" because leaves 1983's pre-TCA operation entirely unaffected. 125-127. 354 F. 3d 1094, remanded. SCALIA, J., delivered opinion Court, REHNQUIST, O'CONNOR, KENNEDY, SOUTER, THOMAS, GINSBURG, BREYER, JJ., joined. concurring opinion, joined, post, p. 127. STEVENS, judgment, 129. 1 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT APPEALS FOR NINTH CIRCUIT. 2 Jeffrey A. Lamken argued cause petitioners. With him briefs were T. Peter Pierce, Gregory M. Kunert, Nicholas P. Miller. 3 James Feldman States amicus curiae urging reversal. brief Acting Solicitor General Clement, Assistant Attorney Keisler, Deputy Hungar, Thomas Bondy. 4 Seth Waxman respondent. William Lake, Jonathan J. Frankel, Paul R. Q. Wolfson, Brian W. Murray, Wilkie Cheong, Christopher D. Imlay, David Kaufman.* 5 JUSTICE SCALIA Court. 6 We decide case whether set forth Rev. Stat. 1979, 7 * enacted 110 56, promote competition higher quality American telecommunications services "encourage rapid deployment new technologies." Ibid. One accomplish these goals was reduction impediments imposed upon installation facilities communications, such antenna towers. To end, amended 48 1064, 151, codified at 332(c)(7). Under provision, "unreasonably discriminate among providers functionally equivalent services," 332(c)(7)(B)(i)(I), take "prohibit effect prohibiting personal 332(c)(7)(B)(i)(II), limit placement basis environmental effects frequency emissions," 332(c)(7)(B)(iv). They act requests authorization locate "within reasonable period time," 332(c)(7)(B)(ii), each decision denying "be writing supported substantial evidence contained written record," 332(c)(7)(B)(iii). Lastly, central present case, provides follows: 8 "Any person adversely failure State instrumentality thereof subparagraph may, act, 9 Respondent Mark owns home low-density, residential neighborhood city Rancho Palos Verdes, California (City). His property located high elevation, near peak Verdes Peninsula. Abrams, 101 Cal. App. 4th 367, 371, 124 Rptr. 2d 80, 82 (2002). record reflects location both scenic its ideal transmissions. Id., 371-372, 2d, 82-83. 10 1989, obtained 52.5-foot amateur use.1 He installed shortly thereafter, years followed placed several smaller, tripod antennas without prior City. used noncommercial purposes (to provide service relay signals other operators) commercial customers two-way portable mobile transceivers, repeat so enable greater range transmission). 11 1998, second tower. course investigating application, learned using service, violation ordinance requiring "conditional-use permit" Planning Commission (Commission) use. See Resolution 2000-12 ("A Denying Prejudice Conditional Use Permit 207 Proposed Commercial Existing Antennae Antenna Support Structure, Located 44 Oceanaire Drive Del Cerro Neighborhood"), Pet. Cert. 54a. On suit City, Los Angeles County Superior enjoined purpose. supra, 373, 84; 35a. 12 Two weeks later, July 1999, applied requisite permit. drew strong opposition neighbors. conducted two hearings accepted evidence, application. 54a-63a. explained granting operate commercially "would perpetuate . adverse visual impacts" existing establish precedent similar projects areas future. 57a. also concluded denial consistent making findings complied provision's requirements. 61a-62a. council appeal. 52a. generally CV00-09071-SVW (RNBx) (CD Cal., Jan. 9, 2002), 22a-23a. 13 August 24, 2000, against Central California, alleging, relevant, use violated particular, charged discriminated provide, effectively prohibited services, record, 17a. §§ 1988. Plaintiff/Petitioner's Brief Re: Remedies Damages, Case 00-09071-SVW (RNBX) Feb. 25, Reply Petitioners 2a-7a. 14 Notwithstanding direction courts basis," complaint until 2002, 16 months filing; evidence. 23a-26a. rest esthetic concerns, question already existence remain place whatever disposition 23a-24a. Nor, said, reasonably base fear setting areas, impacts structures always denial. 25a. light paucity support "an spite community." 24a. order issued actions. Judgment Injunction, Mar. 18, 14a. Accordingly, appealed. 15 Appeals point, remanded determination fees. 1101 (2004). granted certiorari. 542 965 II Title 17 "Every who, color statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, usage, Territory subjects, causes subjected, citizen jurisdiction deprivation rights, privileges, immunities secured Constitution laws, liable party injured law, equity, proper proceeding redress." 18 Maine Thiboutot, 448 (1980), we section "means what says" authorizes suits statutes well Constitution. 4. 19 Our subsequent made clear, however, avenue every time actor violates law. As threshold matter, text permits "rights, broader vaguer `benefits' `interests.'" 283 (2002) (emphasis original). sustain belongs. id., 285. 20 showing, "there rebuttable 1983." 341 (1997). defeat demonstrating newly right. ibid.; Smith Robinson, 468 992, 1012 (1984). found directly creating right, inferred incompatible Blessing, 341.2 Middlesex Sewerage Authority National Sea Clammers Assn., 453 1, 19-20 (1981). "The crucial consideration intended." Smith, 1012. B 21 conceded below, neither nor Government disputes here, rights; assume, arguendo, so. critical question, then, conclude 22 more expansive said setting, "[t]he one method enforcing substantive rule suggests preclude others." Alexander Sandoval, 532 275, 290 (2001). Thus, restrictive statutory violations been dividing line between lie 23 unavailable cases: Smith. Both decisions rested itself. 1011-1012 (recognizing render superfluous most detailed procedural protections outlined statute"); Clammers, ("[W]hen official alleged own comprehensive scheme, requirements procedure bypassed bringing 1983" (internal quotation marks omitted)). all emphasized issue, (or, cases, even administrative remedy) violated. 348 ("Unlike programs issue [Sea Smith], IV-D contains either aggrieved persons can seek redress"); Livadas Bradshaw, 512 107, 133-134 (1994) (there "complete absence interference" statute); Golden Transit Corp. Angeles, 493 103, 108-109 (1989) ("There preventing interference federally protected labor foreclose remedy"); Wilder Virginia Hospital 496 498, 521 (1990) ("The Medicaid enforcement" comparable Smith); Wright Roanoke Redevelopment Housing Authority, 479 418, 427 (1987) ("In Smith..., themselves thereby evidencing supplant remedy. There nothing kind Act"). 24 amicus, joined urges us hold availability merely indicative of, conclusively establishes, relief. Amicus Curiae 17; 35. decline ordinary inference surely overcome textual indication, implicit, complement, supplant, 25 is, TCA, Judicial available, moreover, (the lower are seemingly disagreement point3), costs.4 A contrast, brought much later action,5 need heard decided basis. And successful recover costs S., 9. Liability particularly severe impact context, (often substantial) legal expenses large interests misapplication complex novel scheme. Nextel Partners Inc. Kingston Township, 286 687, 695 (CA3 2002) (Alito, J.) ("TCA often corporations affiliated entities, whereas defendants small, rural municipalities"); Primeco Personal Communications, Ltd. Partnership Mequon, 352 1147, 1152 (CA7 2003) (Posner, (similar). 26 Respondent's response attorney's-fees point "policy argumen[t]," properly left Congress. 35-36. That assumes, Congress's refusal attach represent choice. adopt opposite assumption deliberate evaded 1011-1012, n. 5; 14, 20. 27 enjoy argues adopted Wilson Garcia, 471 261 (1985), claims governed state-law personal-injury torts, apply contain limitations; argues, displaces otherwise applicable limitations. This contention cannot reconciled our Wilson, rejected proposition claim depends nature underlying being asserted. 271-275. instead "a directive select, State, appropriate claims." 275 added); Owens Okure, 488 235, 240-241 ("42 requires borrow analogous limitations" added)). acknowledged few based rights," 278, carved out exception them. that, if 1658 (2000 ed., Supp. II), applies 5, 1658's 4-year inapplicable. so, claims, requirement falls prefatory clause, "Except law."6 think language ("within act") inextricably linked indeed, embedded ("may jurisdiction"). It possibly regarded 332(c)(7)(B). Cf. Agency Holding Malley-Duff & Associates, Inc., 483 143, 168 (SCALIA, judgment) ("Federal almost invariably tied action"). argument thus reduces suggestion "borrow" "[e]xcept law" clause suggestion. C 29 conclusion part, 601(c)(1), note following 152. 3d, 1099-1100. reads "(1) NO IMPLIED EFFECT amendments modify, impair, supersede Federal, law unless amendments." took statement reasoning "`impair'" section. 1100. 31 apt assessment "impair[ment]" consists of. do, Indeed, crux holding whatsoever: conversely, enactment continue enactment. saving require go further standards. regard statute: [Abrams] [§ 332(c)(7)] arguably exist before passage [the TCA]. therefore, TCA] asserted framework 1983]." Great Fed. Sav. Loan Assn. Novotny, 442 366, 376-377 (1979). 32 interpretation Clammers. Saving clauses attached should interpreted "`restrict common standard limitation (including Administrator agency).' 33 1365(e)." 7, 10; 7-8, 11. read "preserve" they "refer th[e] [at issue]. ." 20-21, 31. 34 Enforcement therefore judgment reversed, proceedings opinion. 35 ordered. Notes: Briefs ofamici reversal Alabama et al. Troy King, Alabama, Kevin Newsom, General, Attorneys their respective jurisdictions Gregg Renkes Alaska, Jane Brady Delaware, Douglas B. Moylan Guam, Bennett Hawaii, Lisa Madigan Illinois, Steve Carter Indiana, Tom Reilly Massachusetts, Mike McGrath Montana, Jeremiah (Jay) Nixon Missouri, Sandoval Nevada, Jim Petro Ohio, Hardy Myers Oregon, Lawrence E. Long South Dakota, Greg Abbott Texas, L. Shurtleff Utah, H. Sorrell Vermont, Jerry Kilgore Virginia; Local Governments Roy Englert, Jr., Max Huffman, N. Horwood, Hopkins; League Cities Richard Ruda, I. Crowley, Robert Long, Heidi Doerhoff. amici affirmance Mobile Association Russell Lukas; Cellular Internet Andrew G. McBride, Joshua Turner, Michael Altschul; Lawyers' Committee Civil Rights Law Reginald Steer Foreman; Public Citizen, Scott Nelson; Kay, Barry Richard. approval specified maximum height 40 feet, but, error, 12.5 feet taller. 1095 (CA9 2004) contravene canon implied repeal, seePosadas Bank, 296 497, 503 (1936), inapplicable civil "some defined right," 376 (1979) (dealing related 1985(3)). "we faced repeal," "may framework" earlier one. 376-377. ComparePrimeco 1152-1153 (damages presumptively available), Omnipoint MB Operations, LLC Lincoln, 107 108, 120-121 (Mass. 2000) ("[T]he majority district mandatory injunction"). Absent contrary, litigants bear costsAlyeska Pipeline Service Co. Wilderness Society, 421 240, 249-250 (1975). 1934 award number provisions, See, e. g., 206, 325(e)(10), 551(f)(2)(C), 605(e)(3)(B)(iii). tortsWilson 261, 276 (1985); (1989). basis, presumably year. Silva Crain, 169 608, 610 1999) (citing Civ. Proc. Code Ann. 340(3) (West 1982)). be, claim. 1990, 1658(a) 4-year, catchall "civil action[s] arising after" December 1990. Jones Donnelley Sons Co., 541 369 (2004), "made possible post-1990 [congressional] enactment." 382. Since here rests seem apply. date commenced accrues." 36 whom GINSBURG join, concurring. 37 I agree wisely Government's proposed "conclusively establishes [Rev. C.] relief." Ante, 122 added). books too many, laws diverse, complex, formula general guidance. 291 (BREYER, judgment). today guidance form "ordinary inference" when exclusion 122. add just literal text, will lead Congress' respect particular statute. ibid. (referring "implicit" indications). 38 Context example, makes clear saw national problem, namely, "inconsistent times, conflicting patchwork" siting requirements, threatened "the deployment" communication system. Rep. 104-204, pt. 94 (1995). initially considered single solution, policy pre-empt authority. Ibid.; Conf. 104-458, (1996). But ultimately approach substituted system cooperative federalism. 207-208. authorities free make decisions. subject minimum standards review. 39 boards, address applications time;" boards maintain "written record" give reasons denials "in writing." (iii). Those affected" action" "failure obtain file days. reviewing determine, things, board's "substantial evidence." resembles governing many agency 208 phrase `substantial record' actions"). suits, differ considerably involve plenary evaluation deprivations; involves deferential matters agency's expertise. And, my view, undermine compromise purely policies reflects. 41 For reasons, Congress, supplement judgment. 43 When fails specify fees, fill gap examining relevant sheds enacting inquiry varies Sometimes whether, despite silence, recognize Cannon University Chicago, 441 677 ask pre-existing (1980). still inclusion designed specifically preserve nevertheless impliedly foreclosed Whenever perform gap-filling task, study structure examine legislative history. 17-18; 1009 (1984); Cannon, 694. structure, history convincing (TCA) appears fundamentally offered 1983.* there shred suggesting able petitioners difficult allowing forward circumstances `would carefully tailored scheme.'" 346 (1997) added) (quoting (1989)). join reservation. 45 flaws approach, persuade me write separately. First, believe strength normal preserve, preclude, rights. "intended broadly construed, forms rights." Monell New York Dept. Social Servs., 436 658, 700-701 (1978). "We lightly reliance remedy.... 1871, passed stood independent safeguard deprivations constitutional Although correct rebuttable, remains true exceptional involving unusually given forecloses 425 (statutory "sufficiently effective raise While find easy met heavy burden instances though explicitly question. 424-425; 346-348. 46 Second, incorrectly assumes totally irrelevant. nearly area surveyed, least acknowledged, lack thereof. Wright, 424-426 history); 1009-1010 (same); 17-18 (noting factors "include[s] history"); 694 (same). Additionally, matter interpretation, discuss during prolonged deliberations probative. CHIEF cogently observed: "In where construction sweeping relatively unorthodox change judges detectives into fact watchdog bark night." Harrison PPG Industries, 446 578, 602 (1980) (dissenting opinion). endorsed view silence questions "can likened dog bark." Chisom Roemer, 501 380, 396, (1991) Doyle, Silver Blaze, Complete Sherlock Holmes 335 (1927)). Congressional probative because, awards potentially disastrous consequences likely 2003), nowhere lengthy hint wanted available. reinforces clue glean structure. concur supporting substantial. includes,inter act." Once brings notes, ante, 122-123, streamlined resolving telecommunication periods govern litigation, see, pace litigation proceeds. pp. 208-209 (1996) (expressing Conference "rendered time" expected "act expeditiously deciding cases" arise disputed decisions). Like am persuaded simply mapped onto suggest others, TCA.

Category: 1