ADVERTISEMENT
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was the only justice to publicly dissent from the Court’s unsigned decision.
In March, the FCC’s Media Bureau announced that those favorable rates could also apply under certain conditions to political parties and joint fundraising committees participating in coordinated political activity with candidates.
Four Democratic congressional candidates challenged that policy before the FCC and later asked the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to invalidate it while their administrative challenge remained pending.
Republican committees then turned to the Supreme Court, arguing that losing the discounts so close to the midterms would force them to spend significantly more money for advertising they had already planned around the lower rates.
In granting the stay, the Supreme Court focused substantially on a procedural problem with the Fourth Circuit’s ruling rather than finally deciding whether political parties are legally entitled to the discounted rates.
Advertisement
The justices also concluded that the Republican committees had demonstrated a likelihood of irreparable harm because broadcasters were already rescinding favorable advertising rates after the Fourth Circuit ruling.
Jackson disagreed, writing that she did not believe the Republican committees were likely to succeed on their argument that the Fourth Circuit lacked jurisdiction.
The immediate practical result is that qualifying party committees can once again receive the favorable broadcast rates while the legal fight continues.
The decision follows a separate Supreme Court ruling in June that struck down limits on coordinated spending between political parties and their candidates, expanding how much national party organizations can spend in cooperation with campaigns.
Combined, the two decisions mean parties can coordinate greater amounts of advertising spending with candidates while potentially purchasing some of that airtime at the lower rates traditionally associated with candidate advertising.
