11th Circuit Judges Press Consumers' Research on USF Nondelegation Challenge

A panel of judges on the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals pressed Consumers' Research Wednesday on its argument that the FCC violated the nondelegation doctrine by approving calculations provided by the Universal Service Administration Co. to determine quarterly USF contribution factors. Judge Charles Wilson during oral argument in case 22-13315 asked about whether any issues with the intelligible principles are articulated in Communications Act Section 254. Consumers’ Research attorney Trent McCotter argued “the FCC itself has stated that they are aspirational only,” to which Wilson noted the U.S. Supreme Court called it a "pretty lenient" standard. The FCC, not USAC, acts ministerially in setting quarterly contribution factors, McCotter said, saying the USF statute “contains no such express limitations or rates or formulas.” Judge Kevin Newsom asked what sort of agency participation should be permissible, noting the leniency of the statute at issue. McCotter cited a dissent from Justice Neil Gorsuch that argued an agency “could undertake a particular fact finding to fill in the gaps” so Congress could direct the FCC to calculate the difference between particular prices. “So that's the best authority that you can cite in support of your position as a dissent?” Newsom asked, noting he wasn't aware of any authority after the 1930s being struck down for violating the nondelegation doctrine. Judge Wilson asked "so that the record does reflect that in the past" whether the FCC rejected or modified USAC calculations. FCC attorney Adam Crews noted several instances of the agency doing so and said the commission is "not often intervening" or changing calculations it receives "because what USAC is doing is so routine."