Everything you need to know about ranked-choice voting in one spot. Click to learn more!

VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC., et al. v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, et al. (2002)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Seal of the Supreme Court of the United States
VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC., et al. v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, et al.
Term: 2001
Important Dates
Argued: October 10, 2001
Decided: May 13, 2002
Outcome
Affirmed and reversed (or vacated) in part and remanded
Vote
6-2
Majority
Ruth Bader GinsburgAnthony KennedyWilliam RehnquistDavid SouterJohn Paul StevensClarence Thomas
Dissenting
Stephen BreyerAntonin Scalia

VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC., et al. v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, et al. is a case that was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on May 13, 2002. The case was argued before the court on October 10, 2001.

In a 6-2 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed and reversed (or vacated) in part the ruling of the lower court and remanded the case for further proceedings consistent with the Court's opinion. The case originated from the U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

For a full list of cases decided in the 2000s, click here. For a full list of cases decided by the Rehnquist Court, click here.

[1]

About the case

  • Subject matter: Economic Activity - Federal and some few state regulations of public utilities regulation: telephone or telegraph company
  • Petitioner: Telephone, telecommunications, or telegraph company
  • Petitioner state: Unknown
  • Respondent type: Federal Communications Commission (including a predecessor, Federal Radio Commission)
  • Respondent state: Unknown
  • Citation: 535 U.S. 467
  • How the court took jurisdiction: Cert
  • What type of decision was made: Opinion of the court (orally argued)
  • Who was the chief justice: William Rehnquist
  • Who wrote the majority opinion: David Souter

These data points were accessed from The Supreme Court Database, which also attempts to categorize the ideological direction of the court's ruling in each case. This case's ruling was categorized as liberal.

See also

External links

Footnotes