Court blocks Trump FCC order that could flood broadcast TV with more election ads
Court blocks Trump FCC order that could flood broadcast TV with more election ads
法院叫停特朗普政府时期 FCC 令，该令或导致广播电视充斥更多选举广告
A federal appeals court yesterday blocked a Trump administration decision that could have resulted in even more political advertisements appearing on broadcast television during the upcoming elections. 一家联邦上诉法院昨日叫停了特朗普政府时期的一项决定，该决定本可能导致在即将到来的选举期间，广播电视上出现更多的政治广告。
The Federal Communications Commission recently ordered broadcasters to offer the lowest advertising rates to political parties and joint fundraising committees. Four Democratic candidates challenged the decision in court, saying that only individual candidates are entitled under US law to receive what is called the “lowest unit charge,” or LUC. 美国联邦通信委员会（FCC）近期要求广播公司向政党和联合筹款委员会提供最低广告费率。四名民主党候选人向法院提起诉讼，称根据美国法律，只有个人候选人才有权享受所谓的“最低单位收费”（LUC）。
In a 2-1 vote, a judges’ panel at the US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit agreed with the candidates and set aside the FCC decision that was scheduled to take effect on September 4. That’s the start date of the 60-day period before the election in which broadcasters must offer the lowest ad rates to qualified candidates. 在第四巡回上诉法院的法官小组投票中，以 2 比 1 的结果支持了候选人的诉求，并撤销了原定于 9 月 4 日生效的 FCC 决定。该日期是选举前 60 天期限的开始，在此期间，广播公司必须向合格候选人提供最低广告费率。
“There is no question that candidates are entitled to the LUC,” the ruling said. “But it is disputed whether political parties and joint fundraising committees with non-candidate members can also be entitled to the LUC.” 裁决书写道：“毫无疑问，候选人有权享受 LUC。但政党和包含非候选人成员的联合筹款委员会是否也有权享受 LUC，则存在争议。”
The FCC Media Bureau asserted in a March 30 public notice that parties and authorized committees designated by candidates can get the discounts. The National Republican Congressional Committee and National Republican Senatorial Committee supported the FCC’s position during the court case. FCC 媒体局在 3 月 30 日的一份公告中声称，政党和由候选人指定的授权委员会可以获得这些折扣。在诉讼过程中，全国共和党国会委员会和全国共和党参议院委员会支持 FCC 的立场。
“Major blow to Republicans” “对共和党的重大打击”
The judges’ panel said the FCC and Republican committees are wrong. The LUC rule “and campaign finance statutes are clear that neither political parties nor joint fundraising committees with non-candidate members can be entitled to the LUC. We therefore grant the Petition for Review, such that we set aside and hold for naught the Public Notice,” the ruling said. 法官小组表示，FCC 和共和党委员会的观点是错误的。裁决书称，LUC 规则“以及竞选财务法规明确规定，政党和包含非候选人成员的联合筹款委员会均无权享受 LUC。因此，我们批准复审请求，撤销并废除该公告。”
US law requires the lowest ad rates for “any person who is a legally qualified candidate for any public office.” The judges’ panel decided that “the statutory text is unambiguous, and it provides no support for the Media Bureau’s significant and unilateral expansion of the LUC requirement.” 美国法律规定，“任何公职的合法合格候选人”均可享受最低广告费率。法官小组裁定，“法律文本含义明确，不支持媒体局对 LUC 要求进行重大且单方面的扩大解释。”
The ruling was written by Judge Robert King, a Clinton appointee. He was joined in the majority by Judge James Wynn, an Obama appointee, who also wrote a concurring opinion. A dissent was filed by Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III, a Reagan appointee. 该裁决由克林顿任命的罗伯特·金（Robert King）法官撰写。奥巴马任命的詹姆斯·韦恩（James Wynn）法官加入了多数派意见，并撰写了协同意见书。里根任命的 J. 哈维·威尔金森三世（J. Harvie Wilkinson III）法官则提交了异议意见书。
The ruling came in response to a suit filed by former senator and current candidate Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio); Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.); Senate candidate Roy Cooper (D-N.C.), the former governor of North Carolina; and US Rep. Kristen McDonald Rivet (D-Mich.). 该裁决是针对前参议员兼现任候选人谢罗德·布朗（俄亥俄州民主党人）、参议员乔恩·奥索夫（佐治亚州民主党人）、参议院候选人罗伊·库珀（北卡罗来纳州前州长、民主党人）以及美国众议员克里斯汀·麦克唐纳·里维特（密歇根州民主党人）提起的诉讼作出的。
The candidates’ law firm called yesterday’s decision a “major blow to Republicans.” 候选人的律师事务所称昨日的裁决是“对共和党的重大打击”。
“Congress created the lowest unit charge for federal candidates, and the Fourth Circuit confirmed today that candidate means candidate, not political party or joint fundraising committee,” said a statement issued by Elias Law Group partners Rachel Jacobs and Jacquelyn Lopez. “This ruling is a huge blow to the Republican Party, which was hoping to throw a lifeline to its weak and failing federal campaigns by paying for television advertising at low rates that Congress reserved for federal candidates alone.” Elias Law Group 合伙人瑞秋·雅各布斯（Rachel Jacobs）和杰奎琳·洛佩兹（Jacquelyn Lopez）发表声明称：“国会为联邦候选人设立了最低单位收费，第四巡回法院今天确认，候选人就是候选人，而不是政党或联合筹款委员会。这一裁决对共和党来说是一个巨大的打击，他们本希望通过以国会仅为联邦候选人保留的低费率支付电视广告费用，来为其疲软且失败的联邦竞选活动提供救命稻草。”
Supreme Court struck down coordination limits 最高法院推翻了协调支出限制
Elias Law Group said the FCC decision on TV ads took on new significance in June when the Supreme Court “struck down longstanding limits on how much party committees may spend in coordination with their federal candidates” in National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission. Elias Law Group 表示，FCC 关于电视广告的决定在 6 月份具有了新的意义，当时最高法院在“全国共和党参议院委员会诉联邦选举委员会案”中，“推翻了政党委员会与联邦候选人协调支出金额的长期限制”。
The Supreme Court ruling “did not address whether parties can access the federal candidate discount when they engage in coordinated spending,” leaving the TV advertisement question to be decided by lower courts, Elias Law Group said. Elias Law Group 指出，最高法院的裁决“并未涉及政党在进行协调支出时是否可以享受联邦候选人折扣”，从而将电视广告问题留给了下级法院裁决。
The Democratic candidates pointed out that in the recent Supreme Court case, the US solicitor general stated that the LUC statute “require[s] broadcasters to charge low rates for candidate spending, but not for party spending—whether coordinated or independent.” They argued that the FCC’s position is inconsistent with the US solicitor general’s. 民主党候选人指出，在最近的最高法院案件中，美国副总检察长曾表示，LUC 法规“要求广播公司对候选人支出收取低费率，但对政党支出则不然——无论是协调支出还是独立支出”。他们认为，FCC 的立场与美国副总检察长的立场不一致。
FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez, the only Democrat on the commission, issued a statement yesterday saying the FCC decision would “unleash [a] flood of dark money into broadcast advertising” and give “the biggest political spenders an even bigger advantage over everyone else by expanding the candidate-only discount.” She issued the statement shortly before the 4th Circuit ruling came out. FCC 委员安娜·戈麦斯（Anna Gomez，委员会中唯一的民主党人）昨日发表声明称，FCC 的决定将“向广播广告注入大量黑钱”，并通过扩大仅限候选人的折扣，使“最大的政治金主比其他人拥有更大的优势”。她在第四巡回法院裁决公布前不久发表了该声明。
“Broadcasters are being directed to slash prices and sell their most valuable inventory during their busiest and most lucrative season, even as this same FCC has spent months arguing broadcasters need economic and regulatory relief to compete with Big Tech and streaming,” Gomez said. “You cannot claim broadcasters are struggling to survive and then force them into a fire sale on the one thing that could actually help them compete and increase revenue.” 戈麦斯表示：“广播公司被要求在最繁忙、最赚钱的季节大幅降价并出售其最有价值的广告位，而与此同时，正是这个 FCC 花了几个月时间辩称广播公司需要经济和监管方面的救济，以与大型科技公司和流媒体竞争。你不能一方面声称广播公司难以生存，另一方面又强迫他们对唯一能真正帮助他们竞争和增加收入的东西进行甩卖。”
FCC didn’t rule on candidates’ petition FCC 未就候选人的请愿书作出裁决
The four candidates petitioned the FCC to reconsider its decision on April 29. A broadcast station trade group, the Television Bureau of Advertising, petitioned the FCC on the same day. The FCC denied the trade group’s petition on August 13 but didn’t issue a decision on the four candidates’ similar petition. 这四名候选人于 4 月 29 日向 FCC 请愿，要求重新考虑其决定。广播电台行业组织“电视广告局”也在同一天向 FCC 提交了请愿书。FCC 于 8 月 13 日驳回了该行业组织的请愿，但未就四名候选人的类似请愿作出决定。
Gomez dissented and criticized the FCC for making the decision behind closed doors, with no public docket or call for public comments. 戈麦斯对此表示异议，并批评 FCC 在闭门造车的情况下做出决定，没有公开备案，也没有征求公众意见。
The 4th Circuit judges said the matter is time-sensitive, given the upcoming election season and the fact that the candidates’ application has been pending at the FCC for over 100 days. The candidates asked the court to intervene on June 19. 第四巡回法院的法官们表示，考虑到即将到来的选举季以及候选人的申请已在 FCC 搁置超过 100 天的事实，此事具有时间紧迫性。候选人于 6 月 19 日请求法院介入。
“Despite the time-sensitive nature of these proceedings, the Commission intentionally took no action and offered no response to the Application for more than three months,” judges said. 法官们表示：“尽管这些程序具有时间紧迫性，但委员会在超过三个月的时间里故意不采取任何行动，也没有对申请作出任何回应。”