March 25, 2025<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Tomorrow, Wednesday, March 26th, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on the constitutionality of the Universal Service Fund.\u00a0 The arguments will begin at 10:00 a.m. EDT and should last approx. one hour.\u00a0 The SCOTUS decision is expected at the end of June 2025.\u00a0 Should the court determine that one or more aspects of USF is unconstitutional, I firmly believe E-rate will continue as normal until the FCC or Congress make modifications to come into compliance.\u00a0 I will keep you updated as we get closer to a decision in June.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Should you wish to listen to the oral arguments tomorrow, here is the link:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Note: There are two cases that have been consolidated into the same hearing: <\/p>\n\n\n\n
24-354: FCC V Consumers\u2019 Research<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n 24-422: SHLB Coalition V Consumers\u2019 Research<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n QUESTION PRESENTED<\/strong>: In the Telecommunications Act of 1996, Congress required the FCC to update existing subsidy mechanisms in order to promote “universal service,” supported by statutorily required contributions from carriers offering interstate telecommunications service. Congress defined universal service and adopted specific, detailed principles to guide and cabin the FCC’s exercise of delegated authority. See 47 U.S.C. \u00a7\u00a7 254(b), (c), (h).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Following Congress’s directive in Section 254, the FCC has administered the Universal Service Fund (“USF” or “the Fund”) for decades, with support from the Universal Service Administrative Company (“USAC”). The FCC’s rules limit USAC’s role to administrative matters, prohibit USAC from making policy decisions, and provide for de novo FCC review of any USAC decision upon request.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The questions presented are:<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1. Whether Congress violated the nondelegation doctrine by authorizing the Commission to determine, within the limits set forth in Section 254, the amount that providers must contribute to the Fund.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 2. Whether the Commission violated the nondelegation doctrine by using USAC’s financial projections in computing universal service contribution rates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 3. Whether the combination of Congress’s conferral of authority on the Commission and the Commission’s delegation of administrative responsibilities to USAC violates the nondelegation doctrine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In addition to the questions presented by the petitions, the parties are directed to brief and argue the following question: Whether this case is moot in light of the challengers\u2019 failure to seek preliminary relief before the Fifth Circuit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n A transcript of the oral arguments will be available a day or two later and posted at: https:\/\/www.supremecourt.gov\/oral_arguments\/argument_transcript\/2024#list<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Julie Tritt Schell
Pennsylvania E-rate Coordinator
717-730-7133 – o
jtschell@comcast.net
www.e-ratepa.org<\/p>\n\n