## Facts

- The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted “Chain Broadcasting Regulations” (1941) addressing contractual practices between radio networks and licensed local stations.
- The regulations targeted network-affiliate arrangements affecting exclusivity, territorial restrictions, “option time,” contract duration, and local station control over programming decisions.
- NBC and other networks challenged the regulations, seeking to enjoin their enforcement.
- The District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed the complaints, upholding FCC authority.
- The Supreme Court reviewed the dismissal on direct appeal.

## Issues

1. Whether the Communications Act of 1934 authorizes the FCC, under its “public interest, convenience, or necessity” licensing standard, to regulate economic and contractual relations between networks and affiliated stations.
2. Whether conditioning or denying station licenses based on compliance with the chain-broadcasting rules violates the First Amendment.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed the district court and upheld the FCC’s chain-broadcasting regulations.
- The Court held the FCC’s regulatory authority is not confined to engineering or technical matters and may extend to network-affiliate practices affecting broadcast service.
- The Court concluded the challenged rules were within the FCC’s licensing power and were valid public-interest regulations.
- The Court rejected the First Amendment challenge, reasoning that there is no right to use radio facilities without a license and that public-interest licensing conditions, if valid under the Act, do not themselves deny free speech.
- Justice Murphy, joined by Justice Roberts, dissented, arguing the FCC exceeded statutory authority and raising concern about the breadth of the public-interest standard and its speech effects.

## Legal Principles

- The Communications Act’s “public interest, convenience, or necessity” standard permits the FCC to address nontechnical practices that affect the character and quality of broadcast service.
- The FCC may condition the grant or renewal of station licenses on compliance with regulations governing network-affiliate contractual terms when reasonably related to public-interest objectives.
- Public-interest regulation may reach structural and economic arrangements in broadcasting to prevent excessive private control over program distribution and to preserve station discretion.
- The First Amendment does not confer an entitlement to use broadcast spectrum without a license; valid licensing conditions aimed at regulating broadcast structure, rather than suppressing viewpoints, are not unconstitutional on that basis alone.

## Conclusion

The Court sustained the FCC’s authority to regulate network-affiliate contracts through licensing conditions under the Communications Act’s public-interest mandate and held that such structural regulation of broadcasting does not inherently violate the First Amendment.


Nat’l Broad. Co. v. United States, 319 U.S. 190 (1943)