green
Positive treatment
12.4 score
Treatment trajectory · 1973 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1973
1999
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 15 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited "but see"
National Broadcasting Company, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission and the United States of America, Accuracy in Media, Inc., Intervenor
(18×)
also: Cited "see", Cited "see, e.g."
But see Brandywine-Main Line Radio, Inc. v. FCC, 153 U.S.App.D.C. 305 , 473 F.2d 16, 28 (1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 922 , 93 S.Ct. 2731 , 37 L.Ed.2d 149 (1973).
discussed
Cited "see"
Schaefer v. Miller
(2×)
See, however, McGrath v. Kristensen, 340 U.S. 162, 178 , 71 S.Ct. 224, 233 , 95 L.Ed. 173, 185 (1950) (Jackson, J., concurring), where Justice Jackson quoted Baron Bramwell that " ‘The matter does not appear to me now as it appears to have appeared to me then.’ ” See also Brandywine-Main Line Radio, Inc. v. F.C.C., 473 F.2d 16, 80 (D.C.Cir.1972) (Bazelon, C.J., dissenting), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 922 , 93 S.Ct. 2731 , 37 L.Ed.2d 149 (1973). .
discussed
Cited "see"
Hunt v. State
(2×)
See Bryant v. State, 49 Ala.App. 359 , 272 So.2d 286 , cert. denied, 289 Ala. 740 , 272 So.2d 297 , cert. denied, 412 U.S. 922 , 93 S.Ct. 2744 , 37 L.Ed.2d 149 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see"
Reverend W. Eugene Scott, Phd. v. Joel Rosenberg
(2×)
See Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. FCC, supra (fairness doctrine applied to broadcast of a religious program without distinguishing religious and secular broadcasting); King’s Garden, Inc. v. FCC, 498 F.2d 51, 60 (D.C.Cir.1974) (“But, like any other group, a religious sect takes its franchise ‘burdened by enforceable public obligations.’ ”), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 996 , 95 S.Ct. 309 , 42 L.Ed.2d 269 (1974); accord Brandywine-Main Line Radio, Inc. v. FCC, 473 F.2d 16 (D.C.Cir.1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 922 , 93 S.Ct. 2731 , 37 L.Ed.2d 149 (1973); Trinity Methodist Church v. Federal R…
discussed
Cited "see"
Public Media Center v. Federal Communications Commission
(2×)
See Brandywine-Main Line Radio, Inc. v. FCC, 153 U.S.App.D.C. 305 , 318-321, 473 F.2d 16, 29-32 (1972), Cert. denied, 412 U.S. 922 , 93 S.Ct. 2731 , 37 L.Ed.2d 149 (1973). 32 Thus, a finding that these four stations failed to fulfill their fairness obligations would have continuing legal and practical effect.
discussed
Cited "see"
Public Media Center v. Federal Communications Commission
(2×)
See Brandy-wine-Main Line Radio, Inc. v. FCC, 153 U.S.App.D.C. 305 , 318-321, 473 F.2d 16, 29-32 (1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 922 , 93 S.Ct. 2731 , 37 L.Ed.2d 149 (1973). 32 Thus, a finding that these four stations failed to fulfill their fairness obligations would have continuing legal and practical effect.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Zac A. Crittenden, Jr., D/B/A Crittenden Tractor Company
(2×)
See United States v. General Douglas MacArthur Senior Village, Inc., 470 F.2d 675 (2nd Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 922 , 93 S.Ct. 2732 , 37 L.Ed.2d 149 (1973); T.
examined
Cited "see"
Citizens Committee To Save Wefm v. Federal Communications Commission
(9×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See Brandywine-Main Line Radio, Inc. v. FCC, 153 U.S.App.D.C. 305 , 353-354, 473 F.2d 16, 64-65 (1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 922 , 93 S.Ct. 2731 , 37 L.Ed.2d 149 (1973); Business Executives' Move for Vietnam Peace v. FCC, 146 U.S.App.D.C. 181 , 193-197, 450 F.2d 642 , 654-658 (1971), rev'd sub nom., Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. v. Democratic National Comm., 412 U.S. 94 , 93 S.Ct. 2080 , 36 L.Ed.2d 772 (1973) 13 While the 'market place of ideas' justification for unrestricted speech is the most consistently applied, other justifications for unrestricted speech are also persuasive.
examined
Cited "see"
Citizens Committee to Save WEFM v. Federal Communications Commission
(14×)
See Brandywine-Main Line Radio, Inc. v. FCC, 153 U.S.App.D.C. 305 , 353-354, 473 F.2d 16, 64-65 (1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 922 , 93 S.Ct. 2731 , 37 L.Ed.2d 149 (1973); Business Executives’ Move for Vietnam Peace v. FCC, 146 U.S.App.D.C. 181 , 193-197, 450 F.2d 642 , 654-658 (1971), rev’d sub nom., Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. v. Democratic National Comm., 412 U.S. 94 , 93 S.Ct. 2080 , 36 L.Ed.2d 772 (1973). .While the “market place of ideas” justification for unrestricted speech is the most consistently applied, other justifications for unrestricted speech are also persuasive…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Trahan v. State
(2×)
See also, Bryant and Williams v. State , 49 Ala. App. 359 , 272 So.2d 286 , cert. denied, 289 Ala. 740 , 272 So.2d 297 (1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 922 , 93 S.Ct. 2744 , 37 L.Ed.2d 149 (1973).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Cbs, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, Carter/mondale Presidential Committee, Inc., National Association of Broadcasters, Intervenors. American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, National Association of Broadcasters, Carter/mondale Presidential Committee, Inc., Intervenors. National Broadcasting Company, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America, Carter/mondale Presidential Committee, Inc., National Association of Broadcasters, Intervenors
(2×)
See also S. Simmons, The Fairness Doctrine and the Media 1-2 (1978) 19 Cf. Brandywine-Main Line Radio, Inc. v. FCC, 473 F.2d 16, 62 (D.C.Cir.1972) ("The first amendment was never intended to protect the few while providing them with a sacrosanct sword and shield with which they could injure the many."), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 922 , 93 S.Ct. 2731 , 37 L.Ed.2d 149 (1973) 20 See also Monitor Patriot Co. v. Roy, 401 U.S. 265, 272 , 91 S.Ct. 621, 625 , 28 L.Ed.2d 35 (1971) ("it can hardly be doubted that the (first amendment) has its fullest and most urgent application precisely to the conduct of c…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
National Ass'n for Better Broadcasting v. Federal Communications Commission
(2×)
See, e. g., Brandywine-Main Line Radio, Inc. v. FCC, 153 U.S.App.D.C. 305 , 350, 473 F.2d 16, 61 (1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 922 , 93 S.Ct. 2731 , 37 L.Ed.2d 149 (1973). .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
New Jersey Coalition for Fair Broadcasting v. Federal Communications Commission
(2×)
See also Brandywine-Main Line Radio, Inc. v. FCC, 153 U.S.App.D.C. 305 , 473 F.2d 16 (1972) (refusal to renew license at least in part for misrepresentation of programming plans), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 922 , 93 S.Ct. 2731 , 37 L.Ed.2d 149 (1973).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
The New Jersey Coalition For Fair Broadcasting v. Federal Communications Commission
(2×)
See also Brandywine-Main Line Radio, Inc. v. FCC, 153 U.S.App.D.C. 305 , 473 F.2d 16 (1972) (refusal to renew license at least in part for misrepresentation of programming plans), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 922 , 93 S.Ct. 2731 , 37 L.Ed.2d 149 (1973). 43 As an appeals court reviewing the result of this informal rulemaking proceeding, we are not to substitute our own judgment for the expertise of the Commission in examining the television service needs of an area and in selecting the course which might cure any deficiencies.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Fidelity Television, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, Rko General, Inc., Intervenor
(2×)
See also Brandywine-Main Line Radio, Inc. v. F.C.C., 153 U.S.App.D.C. 305 , 473 F.2d 16, 28 (1972), cert. denied, 412 U.S. 922 , 93 S.Ct. 2731 , 37 L.Ed.2d 149 (1973) (only inquiry under Fairness Doctrine is balance within a licensee's own programming and not in the viewing market as a whole) 36 See cases cited note 35 supra 37 Policy Statement on Comparative Broadcast Hearings, 1 F.C.C.2d 393 , 394-95 (1965) 38 Billy T.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Tate
v.
Blackwell, Warden
v.
Blackwell, Warden
No. 72-6420.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 29, 1973.
Published
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.