United States and Federal Communications Commission v. Edge Broadcasting Company T/a Power 94
509 U.S. 418 · Decided June 25, 1993 · Supreme Court of the United States
At a glance
United States and Federal Communications Commission v. Edge Broadcasting Company T/a Power 94 was decided on June 25, 1993 by a vote of 7–2. The Court reversed the lower court's decision. Justice Byron R. White wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Commercial speech, excluding attorneys” in the First Amendment area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 509 U.S. 418 · 113 S. Ct. 2696 · 125 L. Ed. 2d 345 · 1993 U.S. LEXIS 4402
- Docket number
- 92-486
- Decided
- June 25, 1993
- Argued
- April 21, 1993
- Court era
- Rehnquist Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Reversed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 7–2
- Majority opinion
- Byron R. White
- Opinion assigned by
- William H. Rehnquist
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Commercial speech, excluding attorneys
- Issue area
- First Amendment
- Legal provision
- Communications Act of 1934
- Type of law
- Federal statute
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Dissent | |
| Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Sandra Day O'Connor | Majority | |
| Justice Antonin Scalia | Majority | |
| Justice Anthony M. Kennedy | Concurrence | |
| Justice David H. Souter | Concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Clarence Thomas | Majority |
Full case caption
United States and Federal Communications Commission v. Edge Broadcasting Company T/a Power 94
SCDB identifiers: case 1992-110, docket 1992-110-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Commercial speech, excluding attorneys”
- Fred H. Edenfield v. Scott FaneLaw held unconstitutional
- City of Cincinnati v. Discovery Network, Inc.Law held unconstitutional
- Robert E. Rubin v. Coors Brewing CompanyLaw held unconstitutional
- 44 Liquormart, Inc. and Peoples Super Liquor Stores, Inc. v. Rhode Island and Rhode Island Liquor Stores AssociationAltered precedentLaw held unconstitutional
- Board of Trustees of the State University of New York v. Fox
- Dan Glickman v. Wileman Brothers & Elliott, Inc.
Cases on the same legal provision: Communications Act of 1934
- Federal Communications Commission and United States v. Beach Communications, Inc.
- MCI Telecommunications Corporation v. American Telephone and Telegraph Company
- American Telephone and Telegraph Company v. Central Office Telephone, Inc.
- AT&T Corporation v. Iowa Utilities Board
- Louisiana Public Service Commission v. Federal Communications Commission
- Capital Cities Cable, Inc. v. Crisp
Same Term, same area (First Amendment)
- City of Cincinnati v. Discovery Network, Inc.Law held unconstitutional
- Fred H. Edenfield v. Scott FaneLaw held unconstitutional
- El Vocero de Puerto Rico v. Puerto RicoLaw held unconstitutional
- Lamb's Chapel and John Steigerwald v. Center Moriches Union Free School DistrictLaw held unconstitutional
- Wisconsin v. Todd Mitchell
- Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. and Ernesto Pichardo v. City of HialeahLaw held unconstitutional
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error