Tag: Trump v. Slaughter

With her status uncertain after her term officially ended on June 30, Democratic FCC Commissioner Anna M. Gomez criticized the Supreme Court’s ruling in Trump v. Slaughter. Gomez, who seems intent upon remaining with the Commission, knows that President Donald Trump can fire her and continued her criticism of the administration and the Supreme Court’s ruling. She wrote: “This decision puts at risk how Congress intended independent agencies to function in American democracy. When Congress established the Federal Communications Commission, it made a deliberate choice to create a multi-member, multi-party, independent body insulated from political pressure precisely because the decisions this agency makes about who can speak over the public airwaves, how spectrum is allocated, and how communications markets are regulated, are too consequential to be made on the basis of political loyalty. We are already seeing what political control of this agency looks like in practice, through investigations targeting broadcasters and government critics for coverage this administration finds unfavorable.

“In a companion decision, the Court protected the Federal Reserve from political interference while leaving media regulators exposed. Democracy depends on a free press and the preservation of free expression through all communication technologies as much as it depends on a stable economy.

“For nearly a century, the FCC’s credibility as an expert-driven regulatory body has been a cornerstone of American leadership in global communications. When we negotiate spectrum agreements with foreign governments and international bodies, our counterparts trust that our positions reflect technical expertise and legal authority, not the political preferences of whoever occupies the White House at a given moment. That credibility is difficult to build and easy to destroy, and the uncertainty created by this decision puts it at risk in ways that will reverberate far beyond our borders.

“The potential consequences for consumers and for American innovation are just as serious. Independent agencies exist to make decisions based on facts and the law. Those who argue these agencies are unaccountable misunderstand how they were designed, as the FCC answers to Congress, the democratically elected body that created it, through oversight, appropriations, and legislation. When commissioners can be removed for their policy views rather than for cause, the inevitable result is an agency that pulls its punches and defers to political winds rather than the record before it. Consumers pay the price for that kind of regulatory timidity in higher costs, fewer choices, and slower progress toward the connected future this country deserves.

“Protecting consumers, promoting competitive innovation, and defending free expression are at the heart of my work at the Commission, and I intend to keep doing that work for as long as I am able to serve.”