Supreme Court Upholds FCC Power to Fine Carriers for Privacy Breaches

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the FCC's constitutional authority to issue monetary penalties for privacy violations on June 4, 2026, but imposed a critical procedural constraint that elevates the Department of Justice's role in enforcing high-value fines against wireless carriers Morgan Lewis.

In the consolidated cases *FCC v. AT&T Inc.* and *Verizon v. FCC*, the Court voted 8–1 (opinion authored by Chief Justice John Roberts) that the FCC's issuance of forfeiture orders does not violate the Seventh Amendment because the orders themselves create no immediate legal consequence DWT. The ruling arose from FCC enforcement actions against AT&T and Verizon for failures to safeguard customer location data under the Communications Act.

DOJ Becomes the Gatekeeper for Collection

The decision's most consequential holding is structural: an FCC forfeiture order alone does not create an enforceable obligation to pay Yale Journal on Regulation. Instead, the Department of Justice must file suit in federal court to convert the order into a binding judgment. At that stage, carriers are entitled to a de novo jury trial if they refuse to pay.

Chief Justice Roberts wrote that "because the FCC's order triggers no immediate legal consequence and requires the DOJ to win in court before any penalty is collected, the order is not a 'suit' under the Seventh Amendment at all." This reasoning preserves the FCC's enforcement authority while introducing a jury-trial gate that did not exist before.

Verified Fine Amounts and Scope

The case involved specific forfeiture orders: $47 million against Verizon and $57 million against AT&T Law360. T-Mobile/Sprint filed a separate petition to vacate fines but were not primary parties in the 8–1 ruling Broadband Breakfast.

Implications for FCC Enforcement

The ruling resolves a constitutional challenge that had stalled enforcement but does not automatically clear fines for payment. The FCC retains its authority to issue penalties for privacy violations, but the DOJ now holds discretion over whether to pursue collection. Industry observers note that carriers may choose nonpayment knowing a jury trial lies ahead, introducing uncertainty into the FCC's enforcement pipeline for high-value cases.