Minority Television Project, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, 736 F.3d 1192

Minority Television Project (Minority TV) challenged 47 U.S.C. § 399b and 47 C.F.R. § 73.621(e) prohibiting paid advertising by public noncommercial educational (NCE) stations.
Statute bans paid ads for for-profit goods/services, issues of public importance, and political candidates; permits non-profit ads and non-promotional donor acknowledgments under § 399a.
FCC enforcement found Minority TV violated § 399b and § 73.621(e); $10,000 forfeiture was issued and upheld through petitions and reviews.
District court dismissed challenges for lack of jurisdiction and granted summary judgment for the FCC on facial challenges to § 399b; upheld the rules as not vague.
The Ninth Circuit panel upheld the ban on for-profit goods/services advertising; dissent criticized the ruling on political/issue advertising and raised intermediate scrutiny concerns.
The majority concludes § 399b is facially constitutional under intermediate scrutiny; the dissent would strike down the statute and regulations.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether § 399b survives intermediate scrutiny	Minority TV contends § 399b is overbroad and not narrowly tailored	FCC and government argue § 399b is narrowly tailored to preserve noncommercial programming	§ 399b survives intermediate scrutiny
Whether § 399b’s issue/political advertising bans are over/underinclusive	§ 399b is underinclusive and overbroad, failing to distinguish forms of political/issue speech	All three advertising categories pose similar threats to programming; ban is appropriately targeted	Section 399b’s prohibitions are not unconstitutionally over/underinclusive
Whether the as-applied challenges to § 399b and regulatory § 73.621(e) were properly dismissed for lack of jurisdiction	Challenges to FCC orders/regulations should be reviewable in district court	Judicial review of FCC orders/regulations lies with the courts of appeals under 28 U.S.C. § 2342(1)	District court proper in dismissing as-applied challenges; appeals jurisdiction lies with the court of appeals

League of Women Voters v. FCC, 468 U.S. 364 (1984) (establishes intermediate scrutiny framework for broadcast regulation)
Turner Broadcasting Sys. v. FCC, 520 U.S. 180 (1997) (reaffirms deferential review and need for balancing, not strict scrutiny, in broadcast regulation)
Red Lion Broad. Co. v. FCC, 395 U.S. 367 (1969) (recognizes unique First Amendment considerations for broadcast speech)
United States v. Playboy Ent. Grp., 529 U.S. 803 (2000) (considerations of speech regulation and evidentiary record in review)
Fox Television Stations, Inc. v. FCC, 556 U.S. 502 (2009) (discusses application of broadcast regulation principles to evolving tech and standards)