Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
NextWave Ruling Spells Victory and Defeat
When the government is a creditor, it cannot exercise self-help remedies that may be consistent with regulatory policies but are in violation of the specific provisions of the Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. ” 101 et seq. In Federal Communications Comm'n v. NextWave Personal Communications, Inc., No. 01-653, 2003 U.S. LEXIS 1059, at *7-8, 71 U.S.L.W. 4085 (Jan. 27, 2003), the Supreme Court held that Bankruptcy Code Section 525, which prohibits a governmental unit from revoking a license to a debtor in bankruptcy, prevents the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from revoking spectrum licenses that were bought on credit, but not paid for when due by NextWave Personal Communications, Inc. (NextWave). The Court rejected the FCC policy arguments as irrelevant to its considerations. For spice, the Majority almost scoffed at Justice Breyer's dissenting opinion that the ruling could be interpreted to prevent a government licensor from ever revoking a license to a debtor in bankruptcy.
The Court's decision should end what has become a seemingly never-ending war between NextWave and the FCC. Although this war may be over, bankruptcy court jurisdiction was a major casualty of the campaign waged in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. As discussed later in this article, NextWave's initial battles were twice fought in the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, with the outcome ultimately determined by the Second Circuit. It held, not once but twice, that the Bankruptcy Court lacks jurisdiction to over-rule what it determined to be regulatory actions taken by the FCC (see accompanying article, this page). The Supreme Court's decision did not result from an appeal of the Second Circuit's decisions. Instead, the decision arose from NextWave's appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit). In the D.C. Circuit, NextWave challenged the FCC's denial of its application for reconsideration of the license revocation under the Administrative Procedures Act. The Supreme Court held that the Second Circuit decision was only jurisdictional and, therefore, NextWave's bankruptcy arguments could be re-litigated in the D.C. Circuit.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
How AI Has Affected PR
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.