DC Circuit Sides With FCC on Multilingual EAS; Millett Dissents in Part

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C Circuit ruled Tuesday that FCC policy of collecting information on multilingual emergency alert system notices without requiring such alerts is reasonable, denying (in Pacer) a petition for review from public interest groups including the Multicultural Media, Telecom and Internet Council (see 1705110061). “If Congress intended to require multi-lingual communications in general, and multi-lingual emergency alerts in particular, we would expect Congress to have spoken far more clearly than it has done” said the majority opinion by Judge Brett Kavanaugh joined by Judge Karen Henderson. Judge Patricia Millett agreed with the majority in ruling the FCC hadn’t violated anti-discrimination provisions of the Communications Act, but said in a dissent the agency’s 11-year delay in deciding on multilingual EAS messages was arbitrary and capricious. “The problem of ensuring effective communication to the public during crises is too grave to be ensnared in seemingly interminable bureaucratic limbo,” Millett said. Despite ruling in the FCC’s favor, Kavanaugh needled the agency for operating on “bureaucracy standard time.” Communications Act provisions against discrimination don’t specifically compel the FCC to require emergency alerting in languages other than English, Kavanaugh said. The commission isn’t being arbitrary in not acting on multilingual alerts because there are legal and technical issues with enacting them, such as the lack of FCC authority over alert originators such as local governments, the majority said. It “would be reasonable for the FCC to flatly say that the alert originators (the federal, state, and local government entities) are the parties responsible for deciding whether and when to issue emergency alerts in languages in addition to English,” Kavanaugh said. The FCC plan to seek more information from EAS entities is a repeat of its previous information requests, and the court shouldn’t allow the agency to use it as a delaying tactic any longer, Millett said. “Choosing to repeat an inquiry that has twice been asked and answered, the Commission identified no reason to believe that round three of reporting would reveal new ways to address the multilingual problem.” The majority opinion suggested the agency cease delays. “The FCC should move expeditiously in finally deciding whether to impose a multi-lingual requirement on broadcasters, or instead to leave the issue with alert originators and others,” the opinion said. “At some point, the FCC must fish or cut bait on this question.” The League of United Latin American Citizens and the Multicultural Media, Telecom and Internet Council said the decision wasn’t a total loss. “One point of agreement by all three judges is that the FCC has taken far too long to act,” the groups said in a news release. “Calling the FCC’s delay ‘bureaucracy standard time,’ the panel majority called on the FCC to ‘move expeditiously.’”