City of Los Angeles v. Preferred Communications, Inc.
| City of Los Angeles v. Preferred Communications, Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Argued April 29, 1986 Decided June 2, 1986 | |
| Full case name | City of Los Angeles and Department of Water and Power v. Preferred Communications, Inc. |
| Citations | 476 U.S. 488 (more) |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement |
| Case history | |
| Prior | 754 F.2d 1396 (9th Cir. 1985) |
| Subsequent | 13 F.3d 1327 (9th Cir. 1994) |
| Holding | |
| Case remanded to lower court to determine the legal extent of restricting cable franchising | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Rehnquist, joined by Burger, Brennan, White, Powell, Stevens |
| Concurrence | Blackmun, joined by Marshall and O'Connor |
| Laws applied | |
| First Amendment | |
City of Los Angeles v. Preferred Communications, Inc., 476 U.S. 488 (1986), is a United States Supreme Court case dealing with the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and the extent of discretion given to cable franchises to challenge restrictions on First Amendment grounds. The Court affirmed the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and remanded the case to the United States District Court for the Central District of California, holding that:
...where the city has made factual assertions to justify restrictions on cable television franchising and these assertions are disputed by respondent, there must be a fuller development of the disputed factual issues before this Court will decide the legal issues.