Talk America Inc. v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co.
|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
Mar 30, 2011
|Jun 9, 2011||8-0||Thomas||OT 2010|
Holding: Because the FCC has advanced a reasonable interpretation of its regulations i.e., that to satisfy its duty under Section 251(c)(2) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, a carrier must make its existing entrance facilities available to competitors at cost-based rates if the facilities are to be used for interconnection the Court will defer to the FCC's views. (Kagan, J., recused).
Plain English Holding: The Federal Communications Commission can bar AT&T from charging market rates for access to the equipment its competitors need to access AT&T's network.
Plain English Summary:
Judgment: Reversed, 8-0, in an opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas on June 9, 2011. Justice Scalia filed a concurring opinion. (Kagan, J., recused).
- Opinion analysis: No profit for Bells from providing access to competitors (Kevin Russell)
- Thursday's opinions in Plain English (Lisa McElroy)
- Argument preview: Isiogu/Talk America v. Michigan Bell (Kevin Russell)
- Court grants 3 new cases (Lyle Denniston)
- Petition of the day (Conor McEvily)
Briefs and DocumentsMerits Briefs
- Brief for Petitioner Talk America
- Brief for Respondent Michigan Bell Telephone Company
- Reply Brief for Petitioner
- Brief for Comptel in Support of Petitioners
- Brief for the United States in Support of Petitioners
- Brief for Centurylink, Qwest Communications International, and Windstream Corporation in Support of Respondent
- Brief for Verizon in Support of Respondent
- Brief for United States Telecom Association and Network Engineers in Support of Respondent
- Brief for Administrative Law Professors in Support of Respondent
- Brief for the California Public Utilities Commission in Support of Petitioner
- Brief for Sprint Nextel Corporation in Support of Petitioner