Mary v. Harris Foundation 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.

• \What the [agency] did in the past is of no moment ... if its current approach reflects a permissible interpretation of the statute.\
• “What the [agency] did in the past is of no moment . . . if its current approach reflects a permissible interpretation of the statute.”
• “An agency does not abuse its discretion by applying a bright-line rule consistently in order both to preserve incentives for compliance and to realize the benefits of easy administration that the rule was designed to achieve.”
• “An agency does not abuse its discretion by applying a bright-line rule consistently in order both to preserve incentives for compliance and to realize the benefits of easy administration that the rule was designed to achieve.”
• \An agency does not abuse its discretion by applying a bright-line rule consistently in order both to preserve incentives for compliance and to realize the benefits of easy administration that the rule was designed to achieve.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).