Eagle Broadcasting Group, Ltd. v. Federal Communications Commission

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• commenting on standard of review applied to arbitrary and capricious claims
• “Arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion review under § 706(2)(A) is now routinely applied by the courts as one standard under the heading of ‘arbitrary and capricious’ review.”
• if the “search for the plain meaning of the statute . . . yields a clear result, then Congress has expressed its intention as to the question, and deference is not appropriate”
• if the “search for the plain meaning of the statute . . . yields a clear result, then Congress has expressed its intention as to the question, and deference is not appropriate”
• if the “search for the plain meaning of the statute . . . yields a clear result, then Congress has expressed its intention as to the question, and deference is not appropriate”
• if the “search for the plain meaning of the statute . . . yields a clear result, then Congress has expressed its intention as to the question, and deference is not appropriate.” (internal quotations omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).