Also known as: must-carry · mustcarry · must-carry rules · must-carry obligations
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A content-neutral regulation that requires cable television operators to carry specified local broadcast stations on their systems. The government must demonstrate that the mandate advances important interests unrelated to the suppression of speech and does not burden substantially more speech than necessary.
Mercury Industries operates a cable system serving 400,000 subscribers. A federal rule requires it to reserve one-third of its channels for local commercial stations that request carriage. Mercury sues, claiming the rule burdens its editorial choices. The court applies intermediate scrutiny and upholds the rule after finding it advances the interest in preserving local broadcasting without burdening substantially more speech than necessary.
Madison Meyers owns a small cable franchise in a rural market. State regulators impose a must-carry rule forcing carriage of three noncommercial educational stations. Meyers argues the rule exceeds federal authority over interstate commerce. The court sustains the requirement because the rule furthers the dissemination of information without suppressing viewpoints.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Maxwell Manufacturing provides cable service to urban subscribers. A municipal ordinance requires carriage of all qualifying noncommercial stations within the market. Maxwell contends the rule violates equal protection by favoring certain programmers. The court rejects the claim after determining the rule is content neutral and narrowly tailored to the interest in viewer access.
Mariam Mansour runs a mid-sized cable operator with twelve active channels. Regulators direct her to carry three commercial broadcast stations. She claims the allocation suppresses her preferred programming. The court upholds the directive because the limited displacement leaves ample room for other content and serves an important non-speech interest.
Momentum Capital manages customer portals displaying usage data. A federal board orders prominent placement of conservation messages that displace fifteen percent of the operator's own content. The company sues, alleging compelled speech. The court sustains the order under intermediate scrutiny after finding the messages advance grid stability without suppressing viewpoints.
Magnolia Foods operates regional cable systems. Regulators reject its offer to display required local-station notices voluntarily and instead mandate prominent placement. The company argues the mandate is not narrowly tailored. The court finds the rule constitutional because the modest displacement is necessary to ensure viewer access to the mandated content.
Must-carry provisions are content-neutral regulations of speech. They are therefore subject to intermediate scrutiny. The government must show that the regulation advances important interests unrelated to the suppression of speech and does not burden substantially more speech than necessary.
Must-carry rules require carriage of local broadcast stations without regard to the content of the programming those stations choose to air. The rules therefore do not target particular viewpoints or messages.
A must-carry rule that displaces only fifteen percent of available space leaves the operator ample room to convey its preferred content. The limited incursion satisfies the tailoring requirement when the rule advances an important interest such as preserving local broadcasting.
…part of which is indicated by the term. If this be the admitted meaning of the word, in its application to foreign nations, it must carry the same meaning throughout the sentence, and remain a unit, unless there be some plain intelligible cause which alters it. The subject to which the power is next applied, is to commerce…