Washington – The Supreme Court on Friday rejected a challenge to a program of the Federal Communications Commission that subsidizes telephone and internet services in unattended parts of the country.
In a decision written by Judge Elena Kagan, the Court ruled that Congress did not exceed its authority when promulgated a 1996 law that established the Universal Service Fund, which requires that telecommunications services submit payments to subsidize the “Universal Service”.
The Court also said that the FCC could delegate its authority to a private corporation called Administrative Company of the Universal Service to administer the Fund.
“Nothing in these arrangements, whether separately or together, violates the Constitution,” Kagan wrote.
The judges were divided 6-3, with three conservative judges by dissiding.
Rates, generally transmitted to customers, raise billions of dollars a year that are spent on providing telephone and internet services, even for schools, libraries and hospitals.
Challengers said the program violates the “doctrine of non -decision”, a theory adopted by conservatives that says that Congress has limited powers to delegate its legislator authority to the Executive Power.
The lower courts were divided on the issue, with the FCC and a coalition led by the investigation of consumers, a conservative group, asking the Supreme Court to intervene.
The opponents call the universal service fund rate a tax form and say that only elected officials, not bureaucrats, have the power to impose it.
The 1996 law is particularly problematic because it does not tell the FCC how much money can be collected through the program, the lawyers of the challengers argued.
The Court has a 6-3 conservative majority that has undermined the authority of government agencies in a series of recent decisions.
That had led some commentators to wonder if it would use the case of the FCC to Turbogar the doctrine of non -elegance.
The current court has not yet adopted the doctrine of non -decision, although in different contexts, most judges have indicated support for it. If the court revitalized the idea, the agencies would face new limits in their powers to implement existing laws and programs that seek to enforce the open laws promulgated by Congress.
Although the Trump administration has tried to weaken federal agencies by shooting thousands of workers, their lawyers defended the FCC in the case. The administration assumed the case of the Biden administration, which had appealed the case to the Supreme Court.
President Donald Trump has tried to expand the powers of the Presidency at the expense of the Congress and the Judicial, so the position of his administration in the case is consistent with that approach.
