| Metro Broadcasting, Inc. v. FCC | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued March 28, 1990 Decided June 27, 1990 | |
| Full case name | Metro Broadcasting, Inc. v. Federal Co |
| Citations | 497U.S.547 (more) 110 S. Ct. 2997; 111L. Ed. 2d 445 |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Winter Park Communications, Inc. v. FCC, 873F.2d347 (D.C. Cir. 1989), affirmed and remanded;Shurberg Broadcasting of Hartford, Inc. v. FCC, 876F.2d902 (D.C. Cir. 1989), reversed and remanded. |
| Holding | |
| The FCC policies do not violate equal protection since they bear the imprimatur of longstanding congressional support and direction and are substantially related to the achievement of the important governmental objective of broadcast diversity. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Brennan, joined by White, Marshall, Blackmun, Stevens |
| Concurrence | Stevens |
| Dissent | O'Connor, joined by Rehnquist, Scalia, Kennedy |
| Dissent | Kennedy, joined by Scalia |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. amend. XIV | |
Overruled by | |
| Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Peña, 515 U.S.200 (1995) | |
Metro Broadcasting, Inc. v. FCC, 497 U.S. 547 (1990), was a case decided by theSupreme Court of the United States that held thatintermediate scrutiny should be applied toequal protection challenges to federal statutes using benign racial classifications for a non-remedial purpose.[1] The Court distinguished the previous year's decisionCity of Richmond v. J.A. Croson Co.,[2] by noting that it applied only to actions by state and local governments.[3]Metro Broadcasting was overruled byAdarand Constructors, Inc. v. Peña, which held thatstrict scrutiny should be applied to federal laws that use benign racial classifications.[4] This opinion was the last authored byWilliam J. Brennan Jr., the longtime leader of the Court's liberal wing.[5]
In Brennan's last vote as a Supreme Court Justice, he sided with the majority in Metro Broadcasting v. Federal Communications Commission (1990), upholding the constitutionality of two federal affirmative action programs aimed at increasing black ownership of radio and television stations.
| Supreme Court and lower court decisions |
| ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Federallegislation andedicts | |||||||
| Stateinitiatives |
| ||||||
| People | |||||||
United States Fifth Amendment case law | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
United States Fourteenth Amendment case law | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
 | This article related to a case of theSupreme Court of the United States of theRehnquist Court is astub. You can help Wikipedia byadding missing information. |