Legal Opinion

At&T Corp. v. Iowa Utilities Board

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided January 25, 1999No. 97-826PublishedCited by 545 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Scalia

In these cases we address whether the Federal Communications Commission has authority to implement certain pricing and nonpricing provisions of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, as well as whether the Commission’s rules governing *371unbundled access and "pick and choose” negotiation are consistent with the statute.

I

Until the 1990’s, local phone service was thought to be a natural monopoly. States typically granted an exclusive franchise in each local service area to a local exchange carrier (LEC), which owned, among other things, the local loops (wires connecting telephones to switches), the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Lujan v. National Wildlife FederationSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  3. Rice v. Santa Fe Elevator Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947
  4. Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
  5. Louisiana Pub. Serv. Comm'n v. FCCSupreme Court of the United States · 1986

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by545 opinions

  1. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  2. United States v. Mead Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2001
  3. Verizon Maryland Inc. v. Public Service Commission of MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  4. National Cable & Telecommunications Assn. v. Brand X Internet ServicesSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
  5. Whitman v. American Trucking Assns., Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2001

540 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API