Acting FCC Media Bureau Chief Alex Sanjenis has moved ahead with “procedures and other requirements” governing an application for review filed by four Democrats pertaining to the Commission’s “lowest unit charge” political advertising rules.
The opening of a public comment window comes three business days after the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ordered the Commission to answer a petition from the politicians to comply by September 15.
Sherrod Brown, the former Ohio Senator and now Democratic nominee for U.S. Senate in Ohio seeking to fill Vice President J.D. Vance’s old seat; Georgia Democratic Senator Jon Ossoff; former North Carolina Governor and Democratic Senate Candidate Roy Cooper III; and Rep. Kristen McDonald Rivet (D-Mich.) believe a Public Notice issued by the Media Bureau on March 30, 2026, suddenly expanded discounted radio and television advertising rates to Political Action Committees.
As they see it, until now only candidates themselves are entitled to LURs, and any change could open up “dark money”-fueled efforts to disrupt campaigns and distort messages to the electorate.
The Carr Commission and the National Republican Congressional Committee argue that the Bureau’s public notice was released to simply remind broadcasters and the public about pre-existing law, offering FCC guidance pertaining to the “LUC” requirements under section 315(b) of the Communications Act and section 73.1942 of the Commission’s rules.
The matter went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, which on September 4 put the breaks on a decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit that would have prohibited anyone other than a political candidate from eligibility for the Lowest Unit Rate afforded by broadcast media when buying election-based advertising. The ruling was done on procedural grounds, opening up an opportunity for the Richmond-based appeals court to essentially try again. It did.
As such, the FCC was compelled by the Fourth Circuit to have Sanjenis announce a new docket for the Application for Review and establish both comment and reply comment dates on the AFR.
MB Docket No. 26-253
Comment Date: September 25, 2026
Reply Comment Date: September 30, 2026
In releasing the details for MB Docket No. 26-253, Sanjenis acknowledged that in the course of challenges to the Public Notice both before the Commission and the courts, “some have noted a lack of public input on the Application for Review, including arguing or suggesting that releasing any decision on the Application for Review without some sort of public process would amount to a legal error.”
He pointed to an August 25 statement from Commissioner Anna M. Gómez which criticized the Media Bureau actions for, among other things, failing to seek public comment on the Petition for Reconsideration and the AFR.
He also pointed to an admonishment of the FCC by the Fourth Circuit because it “did not … seek responses from impacted parties, or engage in fact finding, or secure supplemental briefing, or solicit public comment, or schedule or conduct an oral argument.”
Therefore, Sanjenis says in an unsigned “Action by Acting Chief, Media Bureau,” that “due to these subsequent developments, which may prove critical or relevant to any FCC decision, we issue this Public Notice to facilitate public comment on the Application for Review and announce a new docket – MB Docket No. 26-253 – for all flings related to this application for review.”
And while the FCC generally provides the public with at least 30 days for comment, the agency determined that a shorter timeline “is more appropriate.”
Gomez reacted to the new docket and public comment window. She commented:
This comment period comes months after the Application for Review was filed, and only after the discount window already opened and ads are already running under the very policy it is asking the Commission to reverse, so the people most affected have already lost the chance to weigh in when it mattered. By opening a docket on the issue for the very first time, the Commission is confirming what I and the Fourth Circuit already said, that this process needed public input from the start and never should have gone this far without it. This is less like newfound transparency and more like damage control dressed up as due process, and a delay tactic dressed up as diligence.”
In addition to the AFR from the four Democrats running for office this November, the Television Bureau of Advertising Inc. (TVB) filed a Petition for Reconsideration of the Public Notice.
