Consumers’ Research and its allies objected Friday to the proposed USF contribution factor for Q4, citing unanswered questions from the group’s unsuccessful challenge in the U.S. Supreme Court in late June. The factor is projected to increase from 36% in Q3 to 39.3% in Q4, based on the latest projections from the Universal Service Administrative Co. (see 2508040049).
Consumers’ Research said the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals should look more closely at an issue raised in the dissent and a footnote in the majority opinion of the Supreme Court’s decision in June upholding the legality of the USF. The FCC and DOJ last week asked the 5th Circuit not to require further briefing but close the case (see 2507170063).
The FCC and DOJ on Thursday asked the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals not to require a briefing on a potential remaining issue after the U.S. Supreme Court last month rejected a Consumers’ Research challenge to the way the FCC manages the USF (see 2507020049). The problem for the FCC has been a footnote in the majority opinion, which noted that several provisions in Section 254 of the Communications Act weren't challenged and which expressed no opinion about whether those posed any additional problems for the program (see 2507150081).
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last month upholding the USF in the Consumers’ Research case was a win for the FCC (see 2507020049), but the fight isn’t over, Jacob Lewis, FCC associate general counsel, said during an FCBA CLE on Tuesday. Lewis warned that Consumers’ Research has already renewed its challenge in the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, making a different argument for overturning parts of the fund.
Lawyers for the Schools, Health & Libraries Broadband Coalition and the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society said Monday that the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last month upholding the USF was a clean win for the program and the FCC (see 2507020049). By rejecting the challenge -- brought by Consumers’ Research, a right-wing group -- SCOTUS lifted a cloud that has loomed over the USF for years, the lawyers said during an SHLB webinar.
Leaders of the House and Senate Commerce committees who are spearheading the bipartisan congressional working group on a USF legislative revamp, which relaunched in June (see 2506120091), told us they plan to begin meeting again this month. But they said they feel less pressure to quickly reach an agreement on legislative recommendations since the U.S. Supreme Court's recent ruling in Consumers’ Research v. FCC, which found that USF’s funding mechanism is constitutional (see 2506270054). Sens. Ben Ray Lujan, D-N.M., and John Thune, R-S.D., formed the working group in 2023 as Communications Subcommittee chairman and ranking member, respectively (see 2305110066).
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the FCC’s USF contribution scheme in a 6-3 opinion Friday in Consumers’ Research v. FCC, but dissenting and concurring opinions from several conservative justices appeared to invite future challenges, attorneys told us.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 on Friday in Consumers’ Research v. FCC that the USF's contribution scheme doesn’t violate the non-delegation doctrine. The decision overturned an en banc ruling from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Justice Elena Kagan wrote the majority opinion, while Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote a dissent, which was joined by Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas.
Consumers’ Research and other conservative interests are once again asking the FCC to zero out the USF contribution factor, this time for Q3 2025. The group filed the day after the FCC Office of Managing Director proposed a contribution factor of 36% for Q3 (see 2506110058). The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule in coming days on an appeal of a 5th Circuit en banc decision last summer, which found that the USF contribution factor is a "misbegotten tax.” Justices heard oral argument in that case in March (see 2503260061).
The leaders of the House and Senate Communications subcommittees said Thursday they're reviving the bicameral USF revamp working group, which had paused its work on legislative recommendations last year amid uncertainty following the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling in the Consumers' Research lawsuit against the program’s funding mechanism (see 2407300053). The Supreme Court heard oral arguments for its review of the case in March (see 2503260061). Working group members had considered melding the FCC’s lapsed affordable connectivity program with USF’s Lifeline program and keeping the latter’s narrower eligibility rules (see 2404170066).