In a ruling that favors President Donald Trump’s FCC, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the agency’s forfeiture system for imposing wireless-carrier fines. The Court rejected challenges from AT&T and Verizon that argued the FCC’s in-house process violated their co
When the Supreme Court issued its decision Thursday, it did more than settle a legal dispute between regulators and wireless giants—it determined how much say a jury must have when the government wants to punish companies for alleged misconduct.
The Court backed the Federal Communications Commission’s system for levying fines, ruling against wireless carriers AT&T and Verizon and handing a win to President Donald Trump’s administration. The decision was 8-1.
At the heart of the case was whether the FCC’s in-house proceedings—used to assess penalties in forfeiture orders—deprive companies of the right to a jury trial guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. Trump’s administration defended the FCC’s approach. arguing that the system allows companies to challenge the government’s collection efforts in court. with a jury available if the government later brings an enforcement action.
The FCC fined AT&T $57 million and Verizon nearly $47 million after the agency found the companies unlawfully sold access to customer location data to third parties without securing consent from users. The fines were part of broader FCC action: in all. the agency imposed nearly $200 million in penalties on carriers it said failed to safeguard customer data. T-Mobile was fined $80 million, and Sprint—acquired by T-Mobile in 2020—was hit with a $12 million.
Verizon and AT&T paid the fines they were assessed, but pressed legal challenges that led to a split among regional appellate courts over whether the FCC’s internal process is constitutional.
The second case moved differently for each company. In Verizon’s fight, the New York-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the fine. reasoning that the Constitution permits the FCC to provide an initial penalty assessment as long as the accused company can challenge the government’s collection efforts in court. That ruling prompted Verizon to take its appeal to the Supreme Court.
AT&T’s path ran the other way. In the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the court ruled that the FCC’s initial assessment of wrongdoing and a fine deprived the company of its constitutional right to a jury trial. The FCC appealed that decision to the Supreme Court.
The dispute did not stand alone. It was the latest legal test of whether a federal agency’s internal enforcement arrangement can violate the constitutional jury-trial right—following a 2024 Supreme Court decision that curtailed the power of in-house proceedings at the Securities and Exchange Commission.
In defending the FCC’s system, Justice Department lawyers argued that the agency’s assessments are not binding. Their point was direct: if the government later files an enforcement action in court, the companies can make their case before a jury.
The carriers argued that the FCC’s process pushes the wrong kind of punishment into a place that should belong to court. Verizon and AT&T said the FCC’s system impermissibly relies on in-house proceedings for a process that belongs in the judiciary. depriving them of a jury trial. They also pointed to timing and impact—contending that the FCC’s initial assessments cause reputational harm before the accused companies have had their day in court.
The Supreme Court’s decision also connects to the FCC’s larger agenda. In 2025, the Court issued an important ruling involving the agency’s funding method for its multi-billion-dollar program to expand phone and broadband internet access to low-income and rural Americans and other beneficiaries.
For AT&T, Verizon, and the wider telecom industry, Thursday’s ruling tightens the legal ground under challenges to the FCC’s use of forfeiture orders. The fines already issued are now backed by the highest court’s interpretation of how far the government can go before a jury is required.
U.S. Supreme Court FCC wireless carriers AT&T Verizon fines forfeiture orders jury trial customer location data Trump administration telecom regulation
So does this mean AT&T and Verizon are off the hook now or what?
I swear every time they say “jury trial” it’s like nope, the government just does whatever. 8-1 sounds like a rigged score honestly.
Wait, I thought a jury is automatic? Like if they fine you, shouldn’t you get a jury right away? Also location data consent… my phone literally tracks me 24/7 anyway so how is that surprising.
This is why I hate the FCC. They can just slap millions on companies and call it “in-house” like that makes it better. Meanwhile they still want us to click ‘agree’ to everything. I don’t get the point of courts if the Supreme Court already decided.