• by Wendy Davis , Yesterday

Consumer advocates and former Federal Communications Commission heads are urging the Supreme Court to uphold fines imposed by the FCC on wireless carriers that sold customers' geolocation data.

AT&T and Verizon are fighting the fines, arguing that the FCC's move violated their constitutional right to a trial by jury.

Late last week, former FCC Chairs Tom Wheeler and Reed Hundt -- as well as watchdogs including Public Knowledge and the Electronic Privacy Information Center -- weighed in against the carriers.

Wheeler and the others argued in a friend-of-the-court brief that the carriers could have refused to pay the fines, and then defended themselves at a jury trial if the FCC pressed to collect the money.

"Given the availability of the very thing the carriers complain is missing here -- a jury trial -- the carriers’ challenge has lost its signal," the brief argues.

The new filing comes in a dispute dating to 2020, when the FCC first proposed fining Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile for selling access to customers' geolocation data to aggregators that resold the information.

The agency proposed the fines after it came to light that a Missouri sheriff used geolocation data provided by Securus Technology to track other law enforcement officers, without court orders. Securus allegedly obtained the location data from the phone carriers.

In April 2024, the FCC voted along partisan lines to fine the companies ($47 million for Verizon, $57 million for AT&T and $92 million for T-Mobile).

Current chair Brendan Carr was among the dissenters from that decision.

The telecoms paid the fines, then sued to vacate them, arguing that the FCC violated the carriers' right to a trial by jury. Verizon sued in the 2nd Circuit, while T-Mobile brought suit in the D.C. Circuit and AT&T sued in the 5th Circuit.

The 2nd Circuit and D.C. Circuit rejected the telecoms' arguments and upheld the fines, but the 5th Circuit agreed with AT&T and vacated the penalty.

Verizon and AT&T are now arguing to the Supreme Court that the fines were improper, while the FCC says the penalties should be upheld.

Among other contentions, the telecoms say that refusing to pay the fines, and then defending themselves to a jury if the FCC sought to collect the money, is no substitute for a jury trial before fines are imposed.

The carriers elaborated that the orders issued by the FCC "include official findings of wrongdoing" that can in themselves harm the companies' reputations.

The advocacy groups and former officials counter in their friend-of-the-court filing that any reputational injuries suffered by the telecoms were not caused by the FCC.

"The harms, instead, followed from the bad press coverage of the carriers’ underlying misconduct, before the FCC’s forfeiture proceedings even began," they write.

"Indeed, before the FCC’s investigation, the New York Times report shed light on the carriers’ unlawful disclosure of customer location data," they add. "If any notoriety attached to the carriers, it would have been from that press coverage, not the resulting investigation by the FCC in its efforts to protect customer data."

The Supreme Court will hear arguments on April 21.