Press Broadcasting Company, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Rainbow Broadcasting, Ltd., Intervenor

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the FCC had cured an earlier, tainted decision because the Commission issued a de novo decision after the tainted agency staff had been recused
• noting that the agency's \quick reinstatement of [a competitor's] permit on the basis of flawed reasoning ... falls squarely within the holding of ATX \
• noting that the agency’s “quick reinstatement of [a competitor’s] permit on the basis of flawed reasoning . . . falls squarely within the holding of ATX”
• upholding the decision of the FCC because the Mass Media Bureau had recused itself and the FCC had engaged in de novo review
• \The Bureau's recusal and Commission's de novo review of the matter ultimately defeats the inference of improper influence. . . .\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).