Flowers v. Mississippi
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Flowers v. Mississippi and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Flowers v. Mississippi.
The Supreme Court vacated and remanded the decision of the Court of Appeals in the case involving PDR's unsolicited fax advertisement. The Court identified two preliminary questions regarding the binding nature of the FCC order and PDR's opportunity for judicial review. The case was sent back to the lower court to address these issues.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Flowers v. Mississippi.
The Court held that the judgment of the Court of Appeals is vacated and the case is remanded for further consideration of preliminary issues.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Flowers v. Mississippi. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Administrative Law is relevant to Flowers v. Mississippi
The case involves determining whether an FCC order is a legislative rule with the force of law or an interpretive rule, which affects its binding nature on lower courts.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)First, is the order the equivalent of a 'legislative rule,' which is 'issued by an agency pursuant to statutory authority' and has the 'force and effect of law'?
-
Why Judicial Review is relevant to Flowers v. Mississippi
The case addresses whether PDR had a prior and adequate opportunity for judicial review of the FCC order, implicating the courts' power to review agency actions.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Second, did PDR have a 'prior' and 'adequate' opportunity to seek judicial review of the order?
-
Why Procedural Due Process is relevant to Flowers v. Mississippi
The case considers whether PDR had an adequate opportunity for judicial review, which relates to procedural fairness and due process rights.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)If the Hobbs Act's exclusive-review provision...did not afford PDR a 'prior' and 'adequate' opportunity for judicial review...
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Flowers v. Mississippi that support the summary and concepts above.
The judgment of the Court of Appeals is vacated, and the case is remanded for that court to consider these preliminary issues.
First, is the order the equivalent of a 'legislative rule,' which is 'issued by an agency pursuant to statutory authority' and has the 'force and effect of law'?
If the order is the equivalent of an 'interpretive rule,' it may not be binding on a district court.
