A licensed New Jersey radio station sought, but was denied,
declaratory relief from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
against the application of 18 U.S.C. § 1304 to the broadcast of
winning numbers in a lawful state-run lottery such as New Jersey
has. Subsequent to the Court of Appeals' reversal of the FCC's
denial of relief, Congress enacted 18 U.S.C. § 1307(a)(2) making §
1304 inapplicable to information concerning a state-authorized
lottery broadcast in that State or an adjacent State having such a
lottery.
Held: In view of the enactment of § 1307, the case is
remanded to the Court of Appeals so that it may consider whether
the case is moot as the Government contends, or is not moot
because, as intervenor State of New Hampshire contends, § 1307, in
violation of First Amendment rights, would still not allow
broadcasters in Vermont, which has no lottery, to broadcast winning
numbers in the New Hampshire lottery.
491 F.2d 219, vacated and remanded.
Page 420 U. S. 372
PER CURIAM.
This case involves a question regarding the applicability of 18
U.S.C. § 1304, which provides:
"Whoever broadcasts by means of any radio station for which a
license is required by any law of the United States, or whoever,
operating any such station, knowingly permits the broadcasting of,
any advertisement of or information concerning any lottery, gift
enterprise, or similar scheme, offering prizes dependent in whole
or in part upon lot or chance, or any list of the prizes drawn or
awarded by means of any such lottery, gift enterprise, or scheme,
whether said list contains any part or all of such prizes, shall be
fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or
both."
Jersey Cape, a licensed radio station in New Jersey, sued for
declaratory relief before the Federal Communications Commission,
arguing that § 1304 should not apply to the broadcast of the
winning number in a lawful state-run lottery such as the one
conducted by the State of New Jersey.
See N.J.Stat.Ann. §
5:9-1
et seq. (1973). The Commission denied relief. 30
F.C.C.2d 794 (1971). Upon a petition for rehearing, the New Jersey
Lottery Commission was allowed to intervene, and the FCC reaffirmed
its denial. 36 F.C.C.2d 93 (1972). The Lottery Commission
petitioned for review in the Court of Appeals for the Third
Circuit, 491 F.2d 219 (1974), and the States of New Hampshire and
Pennsylvania were granted permission to intervene as petitioners,
id. at 221
Page 420 U. S. 373
n. 2. Sitting en banc, the Third Circuit unanimously reversed
the FCC. We granted certiorari to resolve an apparent conflict
between that decision and the decision by the Court of Appeals for
the Second Circuit in
New York State Broadcasters Assn. v.
United States, 414 F.2d 990 (1969).
Subsequent to the briefing and oral argument of the case in this
Court, Congress passed and the President signed Pub.L. 93-583, 88
Stat.1916, codified at 18 U.S.C. § 1307 (1970 ed., Supp. IV),
which, in relevant part, provides:
"(a) The provisions of section . . . 1304 shall not apply to an
advertisement, list of prizes, or information concerning a lottery
conducted by a State acting under the authority of State law --
"
"
* * * *"
"(2) broadcast by a radio or television station licensed to a
location in that State or an adjacent State which conducts such a
lottery."
The United States now urges us to dismiss this case as moot. It
points out that the only relief requested was by a broadcaster
located in New Jersey, a State that conducts an authorized lottery,
and therefore the type of broadcast at issue is now allowed by
statute. Intervenor, the State of New Hampshire disputes the
suggestion of mootness. New Hampshire argues that the amendment to
§ 1304 does not grant it full relief. It is noted that Vermont, an
adjacent State, does not conduct a state-authorized lottery. Thus,
Vermont broadcasters will not be allowed, under § 1304 as modified
by § 1307, to broadcast to New Hampshire listeners the winning
numbers in the New Hampshire state lottery. New Hampshire
apparently believes that this limitation constitutes a denial of
First Amendment rights. This specific issue, however, was not
briefed or argued in this Court.
Page 420 U. S. 374
In view of the enactment of § 1307, we deem it appropriate to
remand to the Court of Appeals so that it may consider whether the
case is now moot. Accordingly, the judgment below is vacated and
the case is remanded.
It is so ordered.
THE CHIEF JUSTICE took no part in the consideration or decision
of this case.
MR JUSTICE DOUGLAS, dissenting.
With all respect, I do not believe that this case has become
moot -- certainly not for the reasons intimated by the Court. The
First Amendment provides that Congress shall make no law abridging
the freedom of the press. It is to me shocking that a radio station
or a newspaper can be regulated by a court or by a commission, to
the extent of being prevented from publishing any item of "news" of
the day. So to hold would be a prior restraint of a simple and
unadulterated form, barred by constitutional principles. Can anyone
doubt that the winner of a lottery is prime news by our press
standards?
In our history, Congress has shown at times an appetite for
performing the judicial function of finding people guilty. That is
the reason why the Constitution contains Art. I, § 9, cl. 3, which
outlaws bills of attainder.
See United States v. Brown,
381 U. S. 437
(1965);
United States v. Lovett, 328 U.
S. 303 (1946). For Congress to hold that the radio
station in the present case was or was not guilty of violating 18
U.S.C. § 1304 would be a flagrant usurpation of Art. III
functions.
Our decision should rest not on what Congress has done, but on
the merits of the controversy, which do not seem to me to be
substantial. I would not presume that Congress undertook to pass on
the merits of the claim at
Page 420 U. S. 375
issue before us.
* I would not
remand for consideration of the issue of mootness. To me, it is
manifest that the case is not moot and that the judgment below
should be affirmed.
* As the State of New Hampshire points out, the new § 1307, even
on its face, does not resolve the claims of all parties to this
action. New Hampshire, which was granted leave to intervene in the
Court of Appeals, conducts a lottery; neighboring Vermont does not.
Title 18 U.S.C. § 1307(a)(2) (1970 ed., Supp. IV), upon which the
Court relies, applies only to broadcasts by a station in the State
which conducts the lottery, or in an adjacent State which also
conducts a lottery; presumably, then, § 1304 remains applicable to
a Vermont radio station which desires to broadcast information
concerning the New Hampshire lottery. The restraint imposed by §
1304 will thus continue to inhibit the New Hampshire lottery with
respect to certain groups of prospective participants, including
New Hampshire residents who listen to Vermont radio stations and
Vermont residents who might wish to cross the state line and
participate.