The Supreme Court recently gave the FCC a boost by concluding that it was to be given deference on interpretations of its statutory authority where it was unclear-sort of the government equivalent of saying "the tie goes to the runner." But deference, of course, does not mean the court abdicates its responsibility to rein in a regulator if it has reached a conclusion not supported by the evidence. That point was made loud and clear last week by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which overturned the FCC's finding that Comcast had discriminated against Tennis Channel. The court found that neither Tennis Channel, in lodging the complaint, nor the FCC, in defending its decision to find for Tennis Channel, had come close to meeting the evidentiary burden.
展开▼
