WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s decision at the Supreme Court in Federal Communications Commission v. AT&T and Verizon v. Federal Communications Commission, a case in which the Court considered whether the FCC’s two-stage civil-enforcement process violates the Seventh Amendment, Constitutional Accountability Center Senior Appellate Counsel Smita Ghosh issued the following reaction:

Today, the Supreme Court held that the FCC’s two-stage civil-enforcement process does not violate the Seventh Amendment. Echoing the amicus brief CAC filed in the case, the Court observed that the process fits “comfortably within” historical precedents. Our brief described a broad range of civil-enforcement schemes that feature post-determination jury trials similar to the FCC’s, including some that the Supreme Court had specifically reviewed.

CAC Appellate Counsel Joshua Blecher-Cohen added this reaction:

CAC’s amicus brief also explained that the FCC’s civil-enforcement process differs significantly from the Securities and Exchange Commission scheme the Court rejected in SEC v. Jarkesy. Under the SEC scheme, for example, no jury was available at any stage. The Court’s decision today clearly distinguished Jarkesy, noting that consideration of the SEC’s scheme “only proves [the] point” that the FCC’s process, which provides access to a de novo jury trial, satisfies the Seventh Amendment.