Communications Partner Scott Flick on Supreme Court's Decision to Review FCC Indecency Rules

"Broadcasters also will benefit from some clarity," Flick said in an interview with AdWeek. "If they walked away from it, there would be several more years of great confusion."

The Supreme Court is expected to focus on whether the FCC has constitutional authority to find that an isolated occurrence of nudity or instance of cursing is indecent under the 1978 Pacifica case. Saying that it will limit consideration to issues involving the First and Fifth Amendments, the Supreme Court agreed to hear oral arguments to cases relating to a February 2003 broadcast of ABC's NYPD Blue, which showed a full view of a woman's naked behind, and the validity of the FCC's current approach to "fleeting expletives", established after live Fox and NBC award show broadcasts included the impromptu use of profanities by celebrities.

"That the underlying facts of these cases are so different increases the likelihood of a relatively broad indecency decision by the court, as opposed to a narrow finding that the FCC was or wasn't justified in pursuing a particular case based on the facts of that case," Flick told Inside Radio.

And in an interview with Communications Daily, Flick said of the Court's upcoming hearings, "A decision that, for example, says government can no longer treat broadcasters as second-class citizens under the First Amendment would have a broad impact beyond the indecency context," Flick, who represents numerous broadcast clients, added, "The court doesn't have to explicitly disturb [the] Red Lion [ruling] for a similar result to eventually occur from a sweeping First Amendment decision in this case."

For more about the upcoming Supreme Court case, visit Flick's blog entry now.