GOTHAM CAN CO.

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Red Lion Broad. Co., Inc. v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n, 395 U.S. 367 (U.S. 1969)
  …commission believes that the principle applies ... to all discussions of issues of importance to the public.” Great Lakes Broadcasting Co., 3 F. R. C. Ann. Rep. 32, 33 (1929), rev’d on other grounds, 59 App. D. C. 197, 37 F. 2d 993, cert. dismissed, 281 U. S. 706 (1930). This doctrine was applied through denial of license renewals or construction permits, both by the FRC, Trinity Methodist Church, South v. FRC, 61 App. D. C. 311, 62 F. 2d 850 (1932), cert. denied, 288 U. S. 599 (1933), and its successor FCC,…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n v. WNCN Listeners Guild, 450 U.S. 582 (U.S. 1981)
  …sition that licensees were expected to provide a balanced program schedule designed to serve all substantial groups in their communities. Great Lakes Broadcasting Co., 3 F. R. C. Ann. Rep. 32, 34, rev’d on other grounds, 37 F. 2d 993, cert. dism’d, 281 U. S. 706 (1929). The Commission’s famous “Blue Book,” 16 published in 1946, reaffirmed the emphasis on a well-balanced program structure and declared that the Commission has “an affirmative duty, in its public interest determinations, to give full considerat…
• Off. OF Commc'n OF the United Church OF Christ v. Fed. Commc'ns Comm'n & United States, 707 F.2d 1413 (D.C. Cir. 1983)
  …mittee, supra note 37, 412 U.S. at 117, 93 S.Ct. at 2093. . Great Lakes Broadcasting Co., 3 FRC Ann. Rep. 32, 33 (1929), rev’d on other grounds sub nom. Great Lakes Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Radio Comm’n, 37 F. 2d 993 (D.C.Cir.), cert. dismissed, 281 U.S. 706, 50 S.Ct. 467, 74 L.Ed. 1129 (1930). In its second major programming policy statement, the Commission concluded that “the public interest clearly requires that an adequate amount of time be made available for the discussion of public issues; and the…

Authorities Cited

• Rust Land & Lumber Co. v. Jackson, 250 U.S. 71 (U.S. 1919)
• United States v. Lippmann, 260 U.S. 739 (U.S. 1922)
• Simmons Hardware Co. v. S. Ry. Co., 260 U.S. 739 (U.S. 1922)