Supreme Court arguments make it clear that FCC fines are “nonbinding”

During today's Supreme Court proceedings, justices displayed a notable skepticism towards AT&T and Verizon's assertion that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) violated their right to a jury trial in the imposition of hefty fines. The telecom giants, facing a collective penalty of $104 million for unauthorized sales of users' real-time location data, argue that the FCC's enforcement mechanisms infringe upon their Seventh Amendment rights. Repeatedly throughout the oral arguments, justices highlighted that the companies could have opted for a jury trial by refusing to pay the fines and allowing the government to pursue enforcement in court. Even if the carriers ultimately lose this case, a silver lining may emerge: both the FCC and the justices appear to agree that the decisions surrounding FCC fines are essentially nonbinding and would require a court ruling for enforcement. A government attorney indicated that the FCC might revise its forfeiture order language to clarify that fines are not immediately due until a jury trial has taken place. Justice Brett Kavanaugh remarked on the potential legal victory for the carriers, stating, "It seems like you’ve won on the law going forward, one way or the other." This sentiment was echoed in attorney Jeffrey Wall's reply brief, which noted the government's shift in stance. The case is particularly noteworthy as it involves the Trump administration defending forfeiture orders that were issued during the Biden administration. While AT&T has successfully challenged its fine in the 5th Circuit, Verizon has faced setbacks in the 2nd Circuit, and T-Mobile similarly lost in the D.C. Circuit. However, the Supreme Court's current focus remains solely on the cases involving AT&T and Verizon.