On July 23, 2025, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the FCC’s Top-Four Prohibition in a unanimous decision, holding that the agency’s justifications were contrary to the evidence in the record and therefore arbitrary and capricious. Under the Top-Four rule, an entity may directly or indirectly own, operate, or control two television stations licensed in the same Designated Market Area (DMA) provided that at the time of acquisition, at least one of the stations is not ranked among the top four stations in the DMA. The Court further vacated the Commission’s amendment to Note 11, which extended the prohibition to low-power television stations and multicast streams, on similar grounds, concluding that the FCC failed to provide a reasoned explanation for expanding the rule’s scope. In all other respects, the Court upheld the FCC’s 2018 Quadrennial Review Order, including the retention of the Local Radio Ownership Rule and the Two-Station Limit, finding that the Commission acted within its statutory authority under Section 202(h) of the Telecommunications Act and reasonably considered the public interest factors of competition, localism, and viewpoint diversity.
The Court rejected petitioners’ contention that the FCC improperly excluded non-broadcast platforms—such as streaming services and satellite radio—from its market definitions, holding that the Commission has discretion under Section 202(h) to define “competition” and that its interpretation was not arbitrary or capricious. The Court also clarified that Section 202(h) requires the FCC to determine whether existing ownership rules remain necessary in the public interest as a result of competition, but does not authorize the Commission to impose more stringent regulation through the quadrennial review process. The Court withheld issuance of the mandate with respect to the vacatur of the Top-Four Prohibition for 90 days to permit the FCC an opportunity to submit adequate evidentiary support; absent such a submission, the mandate will issue upon further order of the Court.
Please Contact Us if you have any questions.