# Richard B. Kay v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America

> Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · October 28, 1970 · 443 F.2d 638

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9456953

## Case

- **Full name:** Richard B. KAY, Petitioner, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION and United States of America, Respondents
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
- **Decided:** October 28, 1970
- **Citations:** 443 F.2d 638; 143 U.S. App. D.C. 223; 20 Rad. Reg. 2d (P & F) 2089; 1970 U.S. App. LEXIS 6755
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Bazelon
- **Judges:** Bazelon, Tamm, MacKinnon
- **Cited by:** 41 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9456953

## Opinion text

BAZELON, Chief Judge
(concurring) :
I concur in the result. Petitioner Kay has not pressed in this court his claim that he was entitled to broadcast time under the fairness doctrine. And in the administrative proceedings, he did not raise, and the Commission did not consider, the question whether petitioner can be deemed to have “opposed” the Republican primary candidates 1 on the ground that Ohio’s election laws permitted any voter, regardless of prior political affiliation, to vote in the American Independent Party primary. 2 Thus the sole question Kay has presented is whether the bare words of Section 315 require that he be granted equal time. On this point — the only issue on which I believe *649 it necessary or wise to express an opinion — I agree with my brethren that in these circumstances neither the language of the statute nor its legislative history compel the result Kay demands.
. Compare Use of Broadcast Facilities by Candidates for Public Office, Part V: When Are Candidates Opposing Candidates, 24 F.C.C.2d 832 , 863 (1970).
. See page 648 of the majority opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9456953. Public record. Not legal advice.