SCOTUS Vacates Janet Jackson Decision

The Supreme Court today ordered a federal appeals court to re-examine its ruling in favor of CBS Corp. in a legal fight over entertainer Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction.
Associated Press,

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court on Monday ordered a federal appeals court to re-examine its ruling in favor of CBS Corp. in a legal fight over entertainer Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction.

The high court on Monday directed the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia to consider reinstating the $550,000 fine that the Federal Communications Commission imposed on CBS over Jackson's breast-baring performance at the 2004 Super Bowl.

Story continues after the ad

The order follows the high court ruling last week that narrowly upheld the FCC's policy threatening fines against even one-time uses of curse words on live television.

In a statement, CBS said the Supreme Court's decision was not a surprise given last week's ruling and expressed confidence the court will again find the incident was not and could not have been anticipated by the network.

Last year, the appeals court threw out the fine against CBS, saying the FCC strayed from its long-held approach of applying identical standards to words and images when reviewing complaints of indecency.

The appellate court said the incident lasted nine-sixteenths of one second and should have been regarded as "fleeting." The FCC previously deviated from its nearly 30-year practice of fining indecent broadcast programming only when it was so "pervasive as to amount to 'shock treatment' for the audience," the court said.

The FCC appealed to the Supreme Court. The case had been put off while the justices dealt with a challenge led by Fox Television against the FCC's policy on fleeting expletives.

The case is FCC v. CBS Corp., 08-653.

 

Edit Article

Comments (9) -

HopeUMakeit Nickname posted over 3 years ago
|
I was watching the broadcast in HD and missed the most famous "nip slip" in the history of broadcasting. No one watching the game in HD saw the malfunction. It was a analog event. I am much more concerned about the Taliban invading the US Supreme Court.
Cloudancer Nickname posted over 3 years ago
|
I was watching on a 57" HDTV but the broadcast on my cable at that time was analog. I clearly saw the incident but it was so short in duration I thought it was a full shield and could not distinguish the type of detail that later came out. It was definitly a TiVo event if you wanted to see the detail. No way it was anything other than "fleeting". SCOTUS made a typical BS call on this one.
tvwatcher Nickname posted over 3 years ago
|
Why wasn't it in HD. Was there a different broadcast altogether?
cablenewsjunkie Nickname posted over 3 years ago
|
I don't wish ill will on anyone. But I can't wait for sanity to return to this court either through Obama appointments or just some kind of stroke of clear thinking. I mean, is this kind of ruling really important to the constitution??? We might lose a third network of free TV over a split second of skin???
JamesV Nickname posted over 3 years ago
|
While what I think of these SCOTUS rulings on indecency is not printable in a "family" medium, this particular ruling is not surprising in light of last week's ruling affirming the FCC's rationale in deciding to change course on fleeting expletives, which did not actually reach the constitutionality of the FCC's action but only its compliance with the APA (Administrative Procedure Act). It simply tells the Appeals Court that overturned the FCC action against CBS to take another look in light of last week's ruling. Of course, this does not address the underlying Victorian attitudes that a majority of the S. Ct. seems to possess.
mpegtoo Nickname posted over 3 years ago
|
The rest of the planet has to be laughing at this nonsense. An inappropriately placed couple of macroblocks could have conveyed a similar perception - then who would be at fault?
Kevin Mirek posted over 3 years ago
|
What all y'all are missing is the crassness with which the malfunction was prepared and executed. It was no accident. While I agree it seems petty to react to a split second of "obscene" video on over the air broadcast (air belonging to the public and licensed to those who diligently program to the public's best interest), nevertheless, it was like a child stealing a stick of gum from the grocer and arguing, "It's only a piece of gum." But it's a first of many steps to see how far the rules can be broken. Good for the court! The perpetrators need to be slapped and fined, along with the affiliates that aired it. Breaking the rules must have consequences.
don james posted over 3 years ago
|
Why are people still arguing over the censorship? Isn't every patriotic American supposed to think that mass genocide—ie., in Iraq—is fine, but fleeting expletives are horrific?
Kevin Mirek posted over 3 years ago
|
don james ... you are right about that! Somewhere along the way we lost our sensitivity to seeing hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi women and children slaughtered in the "Shock & Awe" prime time extravaganza. Loss of sensitivity starts with small things and grows. That is why leashing the networks and affiliates is improtant, at all levels.

Today's Top Stories

Classifieds

The Market

Symbol Last Change (%)
Nasdaq 2905.66 +45.98 (+1.61%)
NYSE 8060.43 +115.00 (+1.45%)
S&P 500 1344.90 +19.36 (+1.46%)
Updated 02/04 4:49a ET Quotes delayed at least 20 mins.
Source: Financial Content

Ratings

Overnights, adults 18-49 for February 3, 2012
  • 1.
    3.9/11
  • 2.
    3.5/9
  • 3.
    2.5/7
  • 4.
    1.5/4
  • 5.
    1.5/4
  • 6.
    0.9/2
Source: Nielsen
Reviews
Opinions
Features
  • Robert Lloyd

    Keegan-Michael Key and Jordan Peele, veterans of Fox's sketch comedy MADtv, have a new series of their own, Comedy Central's Key & Peele. It is a genial, at times almost genteel, half-hour in which the pair's obvious niceness shines through even their more pugnacious characters. (Key's version of road rage is to shout, "Selfish!") In a roundabout way, that's the point. The sketches are consistently smart and smartly acted and flow easily from ordinary premises to weird conclusions.

  • Hank Stuever

    Discovery's Bering Sea Gold doesn’t seem at first like it has crossed any new reality TV frontier, relying on elements and structure familiar to the form. Enticingly (to the network), it combines the ocean and the gold and the cold and the reactive testosterone among bad-tempered desperados. To which I am surprised to cry: Eureka, they’ve found it! Bering Sea Gold is a testament to how thoroughly absorbing the genre can still be, when it’s done right.

  • Neil Genzlinger

    All Star Dealers, Discovery Channel's sports-memorabilia addition to the bloated auction/pawnshop/storage locker subgenre of reality television, should have been a winner, with endless stories to draw on and a built-in fan base. But rather than find its own formula, it was content to borrow from existing shows, and it borrowed all the wrong things.

  • Joanne Ostrow

    Kiefer Sutherland displays his softer side in Fox's Touch, a touchy-feely drama merging paranormal, spiritual and sweetly familial elements. shows off his acting chops, long forgotten, in scene after scene. It's heavier lifting than usual for the actor who was often reduced to caricature in 24. Sutherland is all about vulnerability in a show whose goal is nothing short of proving the interconnectedness of human life. We'll see if audiences can tolerate the notion of profound interrelatedness as weekly entertainment.

  • Tim Goodman

    Let's jump right to the most obvious of all sentiments when it comes to HBO's new horse racing/gambling series Luck: Do not bet against David Milch in this one. Like a lot of HBO series, Luck will require patience. It's telling a dense story with nuanced characters and it doesn't feel the need to rush in, like a network series, and hammer home the main themes. But each episode is more enriching, more engrossing than the last and there's Hoffman's superb turn at the forefront, even though his story unfolds with the least rush. Luck is a smart and ambitious series that looks to truly pay off in the home stretch.

  • Mike Hale

    The timing of FX's animated series Unsupervised is unfortunate. A kind of reversed Beavis and Butt-Head — in which the teenage heroes, while losers in just about every way, are also social strivers yearning for suburban domesticity and dispensing Oprah Winfrey-style affirmations — it has the bad luck of coming along three months after the original was revived by MTV. The new show looks awfully pale by comparison.

This advertisement will close automatically in  second(s). You will see this ad no more than once a day. Skip ad