Supreme Court supports FCC fund for nationwide phone and internet access

In late June 2025, the United States Supreme Court confirmed the Federal Communications Commission's Universal Service Fund, ensuring the accessibility of telephone and internet services particularly in rural and low-income communities. This decision stemmed from a legal challenge initiated in 2022 by a conservative advocacy group, Consumers' Research, which argued that the creation and funding of the Universal Service Fund violated constitutional principles by delegating too much authority to the FCC and its administrative body. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had previously sided with Consumers' Research, leading to the Supreme Court's involvement in the matter. Justice Elena Kagan authored the majority opinion in a 6-3 decision, emphasizing that the FCC's actions had been pivotal in establishing universal service programs across the country for nearly three decades. This program has played an essential role in enabling access to telecommunications systems nationwide, with contributions from various carriers accumulating to approximately $10 billion annually. The Supreme Court's ruling also addressed the long-dormant nondelegation doctrine, which restricts such delegation of legislative powers and had been a focus for some conservative justices looking to reexamine its implications. The Universal Service Fund, developed after the Telecommunications Act of 1996, was set up to ensure that services reach underprivileged areas. Telecommunications carriers contribute to the fund based on their revenue and these costs are passed on to consumers. The fund directly supports phone and internet services for over 8 million low-income households, more than 12,000 schools and libraries, and over 9,000 rural health care providers. Consequently, the Supreme Court's decision impacts various vital sectors within the nation, ensuring that millions of Americans retain access to essential communication services. This legal battle has wider implications for administrative powers and the future of federal regulation in telecommunications. While the Supreme Court's ruling upholds the structure of the Universal Service Fund, it avoids significantly leaning into the nondelegation doctrine at this stage. By reaffirming the program's legality, the Court has not only secured funding for critical services for vulnerable populations but has also set a precedent indicating its reluctance to impose further limitations on federal agencies in administering such programs, despite ongoing discussions around the powers delegated to them.