Search for: "FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc" Results 61 - 80 of 108
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
27 Sep 2007, 3:17 pm
Specifically, the Circuit Court's ruling in Fox Television Stations, Inc., et al., v. [read post]
8 Jun 2007, 1:12 am
COURT OF APPEALS, SECOND CIRCUITCommunicationsFCC Policy on 'Fleeting Expletives' Found Arbitrary; Fox Wins Challenge on Fines Over Obscenities on Shows Fox Television Stations Inc. v. [read post]
25 Jun 2012, 1:45 pm by WIMS
"       The Appeals Court said, "This kind of argument is largely foreclosed by FCC v. [read post]
28 Jun 2011, 2:03 pm by justinsilverman
Fox Television Stations, Inc., the “fleeting expletives” case that involves the broadcast of profanity and nudity at times children are most likely to be watching. [read post]
10 Jan 2012, 1:11 pm by Lyrissa Lidsky
Fox Television Stations (expected 2012) and by Brown v. [read post]
17 Mar 2008, 7:11 am
Fox Television Stations, Inc., et al. [read post]
2 Sep 2011, 4:05 am by Howard Friedman
Fox Television Stations, Inc., involves the Federal Communications Commission's approach to enforcing a federal statute barring the broadcast of "indecent" language.   [read post]
3 Feb 2022, 6:24 pm by Jonathan H. Adler
Fox Television Stations, Inc., 556 U.S. 502, 515 (2009) (emphasis omitted). [read post]
2 Nov 2008, 4:00 am
Fox Television Stations (07-582), on whether the Federal Communications Commission provided adequate justification in changing its policy to permit fines for the broadcast of isolated expletives. [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 7:12 am by Marissa Miller
Fox Television Stations, Inc., involving a challenge to the constitutionality of the FCC’s indecency regime. [read post]
21 Jan 2016, 6:49 am by Joy Waltemath
Fox Television Stations, Inc., and, more recently, the High Court’s March 2015 holding in Perez v Mortgage Bankers Assoc. [read post]
1 May 2009, 1:47 am
Fox Television Stations Inc.ADMINISTRATIVE LAW AND PROCEDURE - Agency Action - Standard Of Review"The FCC's new policy that fleeting expletives may be actionable and its order finding the broadcasts at issue actionably indecent were neither arbitrary nor capricious. [read post]