Court Opinion

ID: 9445024
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 21:18:32.757301+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:30:06.245881
License: Public Domain

BAZELON and FAHY, Circuit Judges
(concurring in affirmance).
Our affirmance rests on the Commission’s construction of the statute. We think the different construction preferred by Judge DANAHER is inconsistent with the legislative history of the statute. As the Commission states in its brief in this case, after an extended review of the legislative history,
 “Despite a seeming lack of specific Congressional consideration of premature construction of either the limited extent or precise nature of that engaged in by WSAV, it is clear that Congress did intend both that station construction erected prior to issuance of a permit therefor should not be licensed for operation and that premature construction should not absolutely disqualify an applicant. The Commission’s grant to WSAV, by prohibiting use of the steel stubs which were erected without a permit, fully effectuates that congressional intent.
“Since the Commission’s uniform interpretation of Section 319(a) is consistent with both the language and the legislative purpose thereof, it is entitled to ‘great weight,’ and its decision ought to be affirmed. Union Manufacturing Company v. National Labor Relations Board, [95] U.S.App.D.C. [252], 221 F.2d 532, 536, cert, denied [349 U.S. 921] 75 S.Ct. 660 [99 L.Ed. 1253]. See also United States et al. v. American Trucking Associations, Inc., et al., 310 U.S. 534, 549 [60 S.Ct. 1059, 84 L.Ed. 1345] ; District of Columbia v. Young Men’s Christian Association, [95] U.S.App.D.C. [179], 221 F.2d 56, 59.”