June 21, 2012 12:21PM # Technically Correct, but not ‘Effin’ Brilliant’ By [Ilya Shapiro](https://www.cato.org/people/ilya-shapiro) --- SHARE While not “effin’ brilliant,” to paraphrase Bono in one of incidents at issue in the “fleeting obscenities” case, the Supreme Court’s overly narrow opinion in *[FCC v. Fox](http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-1293f3e5.pdf)* is correct as far as it goes. Levying millions of dollars of fines based on an after-the-fact policy change and a few ambiguous words from a 1960s regulatory statement clearly fails constitutional fair notice requirements. Still, the Court missed a wonderful opportunity to expound on free speech over the airwaves and put broadcasters on the same level with respect to the First Amendment as cable companies, internet service providers, and other players on the telecommunications field. The Court also, as Justice Ginsburg noted in her concurrence, missed a golden opportunity to reconsider its unworkable *Pacifica* precedent. This ruling is not something Paris Hilton should sniff at, but Court watchers expected more. ##### Related Tags [Government and Politics](https://www.cato.org/government-politics), [Constitutional Law](https://www.cato.org/constitutional-law), [Regulation](https://www.cato.org/regulatory-studies), [Robert A. Levy Center for Constitutional Studies](https://www.cato.org/robert-levy-center-constitutional-studies) [![Creative Commons License](/build/cato_2020/images/creative-commons.svg)](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/) This work is licensed under a [Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/).