State of West Virginia v. Michael Lee Taylor

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that the FCC “cannot completely disavow Title II with one hand while still clinging to Title II forbearance authority with the other”
• allowing the plaintiffs to challenge an aspect of an agency rule that 12 “derivatively support[ed] other rules” that caused them injury
• stating that “the Venn Diagram of the two inquiries is not a circle” and explaining that, even where an agency adopts “a reasonable interpretation of the statute for purposes of Chevron,” the policy rationales underlying the agency action may still be arbitrary and capricious
• “[N]othing [] empower[s] the [FCC] to engage in express preemption in the 2018 Order.”
• discussing the background of, and the Commission’s role in, the Lifeline program
• noting “the Communications Act’s vision of dual federal-state authority and cooperation”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).