Metro Broadcasting v. Federal Communications Commission
Metro Broadcasting v. Federal Communications Commission is a significant Supreme Court case that addresses the issue of broadcast diversity and affirmative action policies. In a 5-4 decision, the Court upheld a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) policy aimed at promoting diversity in broadcasting, which allowed for certain affirmative action measures. This ruling was notable because it diverged from previous decisions, such as Richmond v. J. A. Croson Co., where stricter scrutiny was applied to affirmative action programs at state and local levels. The majority of justices in Metro Broadcasting appeared to argue that federal initiatives deserved more leeway, reflecting a nuanced interpretation of governmental interest in enhancing diversity.
However, the decision faced subsequent challenges, as seen in Adarand Constructors v. Peña, where the Court shifted back to a more stringent standard of review for all affirmative action programs, regardless of their governmental level. This evolution in judicial perspective underscores the complexities and ongoing debates surrounding affirmative action in the United States, particularly in relation to media representation and equality. The case remains a pivotal reference point in discussions about how governmental policies can balance the need for diversity with constitutional principles.
Metro Broadcasting v. Federal Communications Commission
Date: June 27, 1990
Citation: 497 U.S. 547
Issue: Affirmative action
Significance: The Supreme Court ruled that Congress had the broad authority to enact affirmative action policies designed to increase minority participation in the broadcasting industry, but the Court overturned the ruling five years later.
By a 5-4 majority, the Supreme Court used the important governmental interest standard when upholding a Federal Communications Commission (FCC) policy designed to increase broadcast diversity. The decision surprised observers, because in Richmond v. J. A. Croson Co. (1989), the Court ruled that state and local affirmative action programs must be judged by the strict scrutiny standard, which almost certainly would have disqualified the FCC’s policy. Apparently, the majority of the justices concluded that federal programs were entitled to a greater presumption of validity. In Adarand Constructors v. Peña (1995), however, a 5-4 majority of the justices repudiated the Metro Broadcasting approach and held that all affirmative action programs federal, state, or local must be reviewed under the demanding strict scrutiny standard.
