Court Opinion

ID: 9564078
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 18:54:03.105661+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:18:13.446716
License: Public Domain

GOULD, Circuit Judge,
concurring:
I concur in full in Judge Graber’s majority opinion, holding that Section 253(a) preempts any state or local law that actually or effectively prohibits provision of telecommunication services. I write separately to add my view that normally local governments will have the ability to enforce reasonable zoning ordinances that might affect where and how a cellular tower is located, but that will not effectively prohibit cellular telephone service. Zoning ordinances, in my view, will be preempted only if they would substantially interfere with the ability of the carrier to provide such services. Cases of a preempted zoning ordinance will doubtless be few and far between, and the record in this case shows that telecommunication services here were not effectively barred by the zoning ordinance.