fcc
beach
communications
argued
march
decided
june
cable
communications
policy
act
act
provides
cable
television
systems
franchised
local
governmental
authorities
exempts
inter
alia
facilities
serving
subscribers
multiple
unit
dwellings
common
ownership
control
management
unless
facilities
us
public
petitioner
federal
communications
commission
fcc
ruled
satellite
master
antenna
television
smatv
system
typically
receives
satellite
signal
rooftop
dish
retransmits
signal
wire
units
within
building
building
complex
subject
franchise
requirement
transmission
lines
interconnect
separately
owned
managed
buildings
lines
use
cross
public
respondents
smatv
operators
petitioned
appeals
review
among
things
found
violated
equal
protection
guarantee
fifth
amendment
due
process
clause
rational
basis
distinguishing
facilities
exempted
statute
smatv
systems
linking
separately
owned
managed
buildings
held
section
common
ownership
distinction
constitutional
pp
areas
social
economic
policy
statutory
classification
neither
proceeds
along
suspect
lines
infringes
fundamental
constitutional
rights
must
upheld
equal
protection
challenge
reasonably
conceivable
state
facts
provide
rational
basis
classification
see
sullivan
stroop
rational
basis
review
statutory
classification
one
issue
comes
bearing
strong
presumption
validity
attacking
rationality
burden
negate
every
conceivable
basis
might
support
since
legislature
need
articulate
reasons
enacting
statute
entirely
irrelevant
constitutional
purposes
whether
legislature
actually
motivated
conceived
reason
challenged
distinction
legislative
choice
subject
courtroom
factfinding
may
based
rational
speculation
unsupported
evidence
empirical
data
adherence
restraints
judicial
review
preserves
legislative
branch
rightful
independence
ability
function
restraints
added
force
legislature
must
engage
process
linedrawing
congress
choosing
facilities
franchise
necessity
renders
precise
coordinates
resulting
legislative
judgment
virtually
unreviewable
since
legislature
must
allowed
leeway
approach
perceived
problem
incrementally
pp
least
two
possible
bases
common
ownership
distinction
either
one
suffices
first
congress
borrowed
fcc
regulations
thus
plausible
congress
also
adopted
fcc
rationale
common
ownership
indicative
systems
costs
regulation
outweigh
benefits
consumers
legislator
might
rationally
assume
systems
typically
limited
size
share
attribute
affecting
impact
cable
viewers
welfare
regulators
safely
ignore
subscribers
negotiate
one
voice
common
owner
manager
may
greater
bargaining
power
relative
cable
operator
therefore
less
need
regulatory
protection
second
conceivable
basis
statutory
distinction
concern
potential
effective
monopoly
power
first
smatv
operator
gain
foothold
installing
dish
one
building
block
separately
owned
buildings
significant
cost
advantage
competing
remaining
subscribers
connect
additional
buildings
cost
length
cable
competitors
recover
cost
satellite
facilities
thus
first
operator
charge
rates
well
cost
still
undercut
competition
rationales
provide
plausible
bases
common
ownership
distinction
depend
upon
use
public
pp
thomas
delivered
opinion
rehnquist
white
blackmun
scalia
kennedy
souter
joined
stevens
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
post
john
manning
argued
cause
petitioners
briefs
solicitor
general
starr
acting
solicitor
general
bryson
assistant
attorney
general
gerson
deputy
solicitor
general
roberts
douglas
letter
bruce
forrest
deborah
costlow
argued
cause
respondents
brief
respondents
beach
communications
et
al
thomas
power
daniel
brenner
michael
schooler
diane
burstein
bartow
farr
iii
paul
smith
filed
brief
respondent
national
cable
television
association
richard
ruda
filed
brief
national
league
cities
et
al
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
justice
thomas
delivered
opinion
providing
regulation
cable
television
facilities
congress
drawn
distinction
facilities
serve
separately
owned
managed
buildings
serve
one
buildings
common
ownership
management
cable
facilities
latter
category
exempt
regulation
long
provide
services
without
using
public
question
us
whether
conceivable
rational
basis
justifying
distinction
purposes
due
process
clause
fifth
amendment
cable
communications
policy
act
cable
act
stat
amended
communications
act
et
establish
national
framework
regulating
cable
television
one
objective
cable
act
set
franchise
procedures
standards
encourage
growth
development
cable
systems
assure
cable
systems
responsive
needs
interests
local
community
end
congress
provided
franchising
cable
systems
local
governmental
authorities
prohibited
person
operating
cable
system
without
franchise
subject
certain
exceptions
section
communications
act
amended
supp
determines
reach
franchise
requirement
defining
operative
term
cable
system
cable
system
means
facility
designed
provide
video
programming
multiple
subscribers
closed
transmission
paths
include
inter
alia
facility
serves
subscribers
multiple
unit
dwellings
common
ownership
control
management
unless
facility
facilities
us
public
supp
case
arises
fcc
proceeding
clarifying
agency
interpretation
term
cable
system
used
cable
act
see
definition
cable
television
system
proceeding
commission
addressed
application
exemption
codified
satellite
master
antenna
television
smatv
facilities
unlike
traditional
cable
television
system
delivers
video
programming
large
community
subscribers
coaxial
cables
laid
city
streets
along
utility
lines
smatv
system
typically
receives
signal
satellite
small
satellite
dish
located
rooftop
retransmits
signal
wire
units
within
building
complex
buildings
see
commission
ruled
smatv
system
serves
multiple
buildings
via
network
interconnected
physical
transmission
lines
cable
system
unless
falls
within
exemption
see
consistent
plain
terms
statutory
exemption
commission
concluded
smatv
system
subject
franchise
requirement
transmission
lines
interconnect
separately
owned
managed
buildings
lines
use
cross
public
see
respondents
beach
communications
maxtel
limited
partnership
pacific
cablevision
western
cable
communications
smatv
operators
subject
franchising
cable
act
construed
commission
petitioned
appeals
review
appeals
rejected
respondents
statutory
challenge
commission
interpretation
majority
found
merit
claim
violates
implied
equal
protection
guarantee
due
process
clause
app
absence
termed
predominant
rationale
local
franchising
use
public
saw
rational
basis
record
unable
imagine
conceivable
basis
distinguishing
facilities
exempted
statute
smatv
cable
systems
link
separately
owned
managed
buildings
remanded
record
directed
fcc
provide
additional
legislative
facts
justify
distinction
ibid
report
subsequently
filed
commission
failed
satisfy
appeals
commission
stated
unaware
desirable
policy
considerations
support
challenged
distinctions
offered
concurring
member
app
pet
cert
concurrence
believed
sufficient
congress
reasoned
smatv
systems
serving
separately
owned
buildings
similar
traditional
cable
systems
facilities
serving
commonly
owned
buildings
terms
problems
presented
consumers
potential
regulatory
benefits
see
app
mikva
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
second
opinion
majority
found
rationale
naked
intuition
unsupported
conceivable
facts
policies
app
held
cable
act
violates
equal
protection
component
fifth
amendment
insofar
imposes
discriminatory
franchising
requirement
declared
franchise
requirement
void
extent
covers
respondents
similarly
situated
smatv
operators
appeals
held
act
congress
unconstitutional
granted
certiorari
reverse
ii
whether
embodied
fourteenth
amendment
inferred
fifth
equal
protection
license
courts
judge
wisdom
fairness
logic
legislative
choices
areas
social
economic
policy
statutory
classification
neither
proceeds
along
suspect
lines
infringes
fundamental
constitutional
rights
must
upheld
equal
protection
challenge
reasonably
conceivable
state
facts
provide
rational
basis
classification
see
sullivan
stroop
bowen
gilliard
railroad
retirement
bd
fritz
dandridge
williams
plausible
reasons
congress
action
inquiry
end
railroad
retirement
bd
fritz
supra
standard
review
paradigm
judicial
restraint
constitution
presumes
absent
reason
infer
antipathy
even
improvident
decisions
eventually
rectified
democratic
process
judicial
intervention
generally
unwarranted
matter
unwisely
may
think
political
branch
acted
vance
bradley
omitted
review
classification
statute
cable
act
comes
us
bearing
strong
presumption
validity
see
lyng
automobile
workers
attacking
rationality
legislative
classification
burden
negative
every
conceivable
basis
might
support
lehnhausen
lake
shore
auto
parts
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
see
also
hodel
indiana
moreover
never
require
legislature
articulate
reasons
enacting
statute
entirely
irrelevant
constitutional
purposes
whether
conceived
reason
challenged
distinction
actually
motivated
legislature
railroad
retirement
bd
fritz
supra
see
flemming
nestor
thus
absence
legislative
facts
explaining
distinction
record
app
significance
rational
basis
analysis
see
nordlinger
hahn
equal
protection
demand
purposes
rational
basis
review
legislature
governing
decisionmaker
actually
articulate
time
purpose
rationale
supporting
classification
words
legislative
choice
subject
courtroom
factfinding
may
based
rational
speculation
unsupported
evidence
empirical
data
see
vance
bradley
supra
see
also
minnesota
clover
leaf
creamery
faithful
adherence
guiding
principle
judicial
review
legislation
possible
preserve
legislative
branch
rightful
independence
ability
function
lehnhausen
supra
quoting
carmichael
southern
coal
coke
restraints
judicial
review
added
force
legislature
must
necessarily
engage
process
railroad
retirement
bd
fritz
defining
class
persons
subject
regulatory
requirement
much
like
classifying
governmental
beneficiaries
inevitably
requires
persons
almost
equally
strong
claim
favored
treatment
placed
different
sides
line
fact
line
might
drawn
differently
points
matter
legislative
rather
judicial
consideration
ibid
internal
quotation
marks
citation
omitted
distinction
issue
represents
line
excluding
definition
cable
system
facilities
serve
commonly
owned
managed
buildings
without
using
public
delineates
bounds
regulatory
field
provisions
unavoidable
components
economic
social
legislation
establishing
franchise
requirement
congress
draw
line
somewhere
choose
facilities
franchise
necessity
renders
precise
coordinates
resulting
legislative
judgment
virtually
unreviewable
since
legislature
must
allowed
leeway
approach
perceived
problem
incrementally
see
williamson
lee
optical
problem
legislative
classification
perennial
one
admitting
doctrinaire
definition
evils
field
may
different
dimensions
proportions
requiring
different
remedies
legislature
may
think
reform
may
take
one
step
time
addressing
phase
problem
seems
acute
legislative
mind
legislature
may
select
one
phase
one
field
apply
remedy
neglecting
others
prohibition
equal
protection
clause
goes
invidious
discrimination
citations
omitted
ot
systems
subject
effective
regulation
resources
available
regulation
necessarily
needed
every
instance
sensible
regulatory
program
requires
division
regulated
unregulated
made
manner
best
conserves
regulatory
energies
allows
cost
effective
use
available
resources
attempting
make
division
focused
subscriber
numbers
well
multiple
unit
dwelling
indicia
theory
small
inefficient
regulate
safely
ignored
terms
potential
impact
broadcast
service
public
multiple
unit
dwelling
facilities
theory
effectively
establishes
certain
maximum
size
limitations
definition
cable
television
system
respondents
argue
congress
intend
common
ownership
surrogate
small
size
since
congress
simultaneously
rejected
fcc
exemption
omitting
cable
act
brief
respondents
whether
posited
reason
challenged
distinction
actually
motivated
congress
constitutionally
irrelevant
railroad
retirement
bd
fritz
supra
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
event
fcc
explanation
indicates
common
ownership
number
subscribers
considered
indicia
small
cable
systems
respondents
also
contend
smatv
operator
increase
subscription
base
still
qualify
exemption
simply
installing
separate
satellite
dish
building
served
brief
respondents
additional
cost
multiple
dishes
associated
transmission
equipment
however
impose
independent
constraint
system
size
furthermore
small
size
one
plausible
factor
contributing
consumer
welfare
subscriber
influence
another
smatv
system
serves
complex
buildings
common
ownership
management
individual
subscribers
conceivably
greater
bargaining
power
cable
operator
even
number
dwelling
units
large
since
subscribers
negotiate
one
voice
common
owner
manager
owner
might
substantial
leverage
withhold
permission
operate
smatv
system
property
also
incentive
guard
interests
tenants
thus
less
need
establish
regulatory
safeguards
subscribers
commonly
owned
complexes
respondents
acknowledge
possibilities
see
certainly
say
assumptions
irrational
second
conceivable
basis
statutory
distinction
suppose
competing
smatv
operators
wish
sell
video
programming
subscribers
group
contiguous
buildings
single
city
block
interconnected
wire
without
crossing
public
buildings
belong
one
owner
commonly
managed
owner
manager
freely
negotiate
deal
subscribers
competitive
basis
buildings
separately
owned
managed
first
smatv
operator
gains
foothold
signing
contract
installing
satellite
dish
associated
transmission
equipment
one
buildings
enjoy
powerful
cost
advantage
competing
remaining
subscribers
connect
additional
buildings
cost
feet
cable
whereas
competitor
recover
cost
satellite
headend
facility
thus
first
operator
charge
rates
well
cost
still
undercut
competition
potential
effective
monopoly
power
might
theoretically
justify
regulating
latter
class
smatv
systems
former
iii
appeals
quite
evidently
believed
crossing
use
public
conceivable
basis
upon
congress
rationally
require
local
franchising
smatv
systems
see
app
app
indicated
however
plausible
rationales
unrelated
use
public
regulating
cable
facilities
serving
separately
owned
managed
buildings
assumptions
underlying
rationales
may
erroneous
fact
arguable
sufficient
rational
basis
review
immuniz
congressional
choice
constitutional
challenge
vance
bradley
judgment
appeals
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
footnotes
initial
interpretation
cable
act
commission
ruled
dispositive
distinction
cable
system
video
distribution
systems
crossing
public
ownership
control
management
buildings
served
amendments
parts
district
held
interpretation
contravened
unambiguous
terms
statute
commission
abandoned
proceedings
issue
see
definition
cable
television
system
respondents
also
claimed
cable
act
franchise
requirement
violates
first
amendment
classification
receive
heightened
scrutiny
due
process
clause
discriminates
basis
speech
activities
appeals
held
first
amendment
claim
unripe
app
refused
address
heightened
scrutiny
argument
without
first
applying
rational
basis
analysis
chief
judge
mikva
dissented
reasons
given
earlier
concurrence
app
appeals
also
questioned
whether
existed
rational
basis
distinguishing
facilities
connecting
separately
owned
buildings
wire
connect
separate
buildings
wireless
media
radio
microwave
transmission
see
app
second
opinion
however
found
unnecessary
consider
question
see
app
presented
appeals
respondents
seek
heightened
scrutiny
claiming
statute
discriminates
basis
first
amendment
activities
brief
respondents
beach
communications
et
al
hereinafter
brief
respondents
confine
however
question
presented
limited
whether
distinction
rationally
related
legitimate
government
purpose
due
process
clause
pet
cert
appeals
reach
respondents
challenge
found
merit
rational
basis
contentions
app
renewing
arguments
heightened
scrutiny
see
brief
respondents
respondents
point
burdens
imposed
franchised
cable
systems
newly
enacted
cable
television
consumer
protection
competition
act
act
appeals
opportunity
consider
circumstances
respondents
arguments
heightened
scrutiny
best
left
open
consideration
appeals
remand
respondents
also
raise
threshold
issue
argue
case
controversy
exists
issue
moot
theory
congress
adopted
appeals
construction
presumably
thereby
acquiescing
judgment
local
franchising
must
depend
use
public
took
action
amend
defend
provision
later
passing
act
brief
respondents
cf
lorillard
pons
notion
congressional
adoption
statutory
interpretations
however
place
constitutional
review
controversy
presented
case
obviously
live
one
since
petitioners
stand
ready
defend
statute
drafted
see
also
dandridge
williams
classification
violate
equal
protection
simply
made
mathematical
nicety
practice
results
inequality
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
metropolis
theatre
chicago
problems
government
practical
ones
may
justify
require
rough
accommodations
illogical
may
unscientific
heath
milligan
worst
logical
appropriateness
inclusion
exclusion
objects
persons
exact
wisdom
nice
adaptation
remedies
required
according
respondents
fcc
act
common
ownership
exemption
provides
support
rationality
another
reason
assert
regulatory
exemption
sole
purpose
exempt
master
antenna
television
matv
facilities
ordinary
rooftop
antenna
facilities
receive
conventional
broadcast
signals
transmission
wire
units
within
single
building
complex
see
app
respondents
argue
prior
exemption
merely
reflected
fcc
judgment
common
antennas
unlike
smatv
systems
nothing
residential
amenities
posing
threat
broadcast
services
see
brief
respondents
argument
unavailing
congress
bound
administrative
derivation
private
cable
exemption
moreover
regardless
origin
exemption
commission
already
applied
smatv
facilities
passage
cable
act
see
earth
satellite
communications
aff
sub
nom
new
york
state
cable
television
fcc
app
indeed
proceedings
commission
construed
apply
equally
smatv
matv
facilities
see
justice
stevens
concurring
judgment
freedom
blessing
regulation
sometimes
necessary
always
burdensome
decision
regulate
way
owner
chooses
enjoy
benefits
improvement
property
adequately
justified
presumption
favor
freedom
owner
large
building
decides
improve
installing
electric
generator
placing
windmill
roof
government
might
well
decide
regulate
use
improvement
government
permits
installation
surely
allow
owner
use
electricity
generates
whichever
appliances
property
selects
however
owner
elects
sell
electricity
neighbors
justification
regulation
previously
exist
might
arise
seeking
access
market
television
antenna
like
windmill
somewhat
unsightly
species
improvement
nonetheless
analysis
applies
government
may
reasonably
decide
regulate
distribution
electricity
television
programs
paying
customers
open
market
without
also
regulating
way
owner
antenna
windmill
distributes
benefits
within
confines
property
opinion
interest
free
use
one
property
provides
adequate
support
exception
burdensome
regulation
franchising
requirements
even
property
occupied
family
members
guests
lessees
well
even
property
complex
encompasses
multiple
buildings
master
antenna
serving
multiple
units
apartment
building
less
unsightly
forest
individual
antennas
serving
separate
apartment
surely
sensible
allow
owners
make
use
improvement
without
incurring
costs
franchising
economic
regulation
even
though
regulation
might
justified
indeed
federal
communications
commission
fcc
one
time
considered
imposing
regulation
see
cable
television
systems
justification
nonregulation
nevertheless
remain
whenever
possible
property
owners
free
use
improvements
property
see
fit
brings
us
private
cable
exemption
applied
satellite
master
antenna
television
smatv
systems
justification
private
cable
exemption
rests
presumption
owner
property
allowed
use
improvement
property
sees
fit
unless
sufficient
public
interest
denying
right
simply
apply
situation
improvement
satellite
antenna
used
distribute
signals
subscribers
people
property
situation
property
owner
smatv
operator
reached
beyond
property
line
seeking
employ
satellite
antenna
broader
market
television
programming
crossing
line
need
trigger
regulatory
intervention
absence
crossing
may
prevent
intervention
certainly
said
government
disabled
constitution
regulating
case
former
abstaining
case
latter
policy
adequately
justified
presumption
favor
freedom
thus
fully
persuaded
private
cable
exemption
justified
size
market
encompasses
see
ante
monopoly
rationale
see
ante
agree
ultimate
conclusion
judgment
reasonable
presume
congress
motivated
interest
allowing
property
owners
exercise
freedom
use
property
legislation
motivated
surely
violate
sovereign
duty
govern
impartially
see
hampton
mow
sun
wong
accordingly
concur
judgment
approximately
multiple
dwelling
units
complexes
large
enough
support
smatv
system
see
ferris
cable
television
law
video
communications
practice
guide
furthermore
whereas
fcc
prior
enactment
cable
communicationsons
policy
act
cable
act
stat
exempted
regulation
cable
systems
less
subscribers
well
serving
commonly
owned
multiple
unit
dwellings
congress
exempted
latter
passed
cable
act
leaving
exemption
based
system
size
respondent
thus
makes
strong
argument
congress
may
rejected
rationale
upon
fcc
rely
theory
assumes
great
deal
nature
essentially
hypothetical
market
moreover
analysis
overlooks
competitive
presence
traditional
cable
potential
constraint
smatv
operator
capacity
extract
monopoly
rents
landlords
legislative
classification
must
upheld
reasonably
conceivable
state
facts
provide
rational
basis
classification
plausible
reasons
congress
action
inquiry
end
ante
view
formulation
sweeps
broadly
difficult
imagine
legislative
classification
supported
reasonably
conceivable
state
facts
judicial
review
conceivable
set
facts
test
tantamount
review
continue
believe
congress
imposes
burden
one
group
leaves
unaffected
another
similarly
though
identically
situated
constitution
requires
something
merely
conceivable
plausible
explanation
unequal
treatment
railroad
retirement
bd
fritz
stevens
concurring
judgment
view
actual
rationale
legislative
classification
unclear
inquire
whether
classification
rationally
related
legitimate
purpose
may
reasonably
presume
motivated
impartial
legislature
emphasis
added