7 Comments
User's avatar
MikeinLA's avatar

With respect, President Biden’s efforts to counteract false information regarding a public health issue was considerably different than Carr’s statements about a purely political (and emotional) issue. Still wrong, per the Court, but not truly equivalent to the current situation.

Expand full comment
Erik Christensen's avatar

No biden's statement was not jawboning, so "per the court" is incorrect.

Expand full comment
Roy Stone's avatar

Good piece, but Vullo has one big distinction that jumps right out at me. It was a case about an NY state official pressuring an insurer to terminate policies to the NRA based on its political speech. Would it even be relevant to an FCC commissioner’s comments about whether a regulated entity has violated the regulations on speech that the commissioner and agency are tasked with enforcing?

Expand full comment
David's avatar

Can you get a declaratory judgment if no injunctive relief would otherwise be available? Wouldn’t that just be an advisory opinion?

Expand full comment
Christian's avatar

Had the same question. I’d love to know the answer.

Expand full comment
Robert Levine's avatar

All of those employed by the show could sue, as could the unions who represent them (and there are several). And they should. It’s not about winning damages (which as you point out isn’t possible). It’s about resisting in every possible way.

Expand full comment
Kevin Markham's avatar

Excellent article! Highly readable, even for a lay reader such as myself.

Expand full comment