City of Arlington v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n

Background

A trade group for wireless companies asked the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to clarify how long local governments may take to decide requests to place cell towers and antennas. The FCC issued a ruling saying a “reasonable period” is presumptively 90 days for collocation and 150 days for other applications. Two cities challenged the ruling, arguing the FCC lacked authority to interpret that statute because Congress preserved local control and allowed court challenges.

Reasoning

The central question was whether courts should apply the familiar Chevron rule—under which courts defer to an agency's reasonable interpretation of an unclear law—when the agency interprets the scope of its own authority. Justice Scalia's majority said the line between “jurisdictional” and “nonjurisdictional” interpretations is a mirage and that Chevron normally applies. The Court concluded the FCC had general rulemaking authority to administer the statute and that its timeframes were a permissible interpretation, so the appeals court decision was affirmed.

Real world impact

The decision lets the FCC’s presumptive 90- and 150-day deadlines stand and signals that courts will usually defer to agencies resolving ambiguities about what they may regulate. That affects wireless companies, local zoning authorities, and anyone who seeks or opposes cell-site approvals because federal agency interpretations of timing and other administrative rules will often control.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Breyer concurred in part, emphasizing practical factors courts should use when deciding delegation. Chief Justice Roberts dissented, arguing courts must first decide on their own whether Congress actually gave the agency authority before granting Chevron deference.