Amy Coney Barrett looks poised to go against conservative colleagues again (2025)

Conservative Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett may be poised to break ranks again in a case involving funding for the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

Why It Matters

Barrett has drawn sharp criticism from President Donald Trump's supporters in recent months after she sided against the president and the administration in high-profile cases involving Trump's agenda and his sentencing in New York.

Chief Justice John Roberts has also been scrutinized over his rulings in significant cases, but Barrett in particular has sparked harsh blowback as staunch Trump supporters have said the president made a mistake by nominating her to the bench during his first term.

What To Know

Oral arguments in the FCC case took place Wednesday after the agency, telecommunications firms and interest groups appealed a lower court's ruling saying the FCC's funding operation levied a "misbegotten tax" on consumers in violation of Congress' constitutional authority.

The justices grappled with the lower-court decision, which involves the $9 billion Universal Service Fund that was enacted by Congress and requires that telecommunications services submit payments to subsidize "universal service."

Those fees are eventually passed on to customers and raise billions of dollars every year. The payments go toward helping phone and internet services, hospitals, libraries and schools.

The Supreme Court deliberated on Wednesday whether the funding operation violates the "non-delegation doctrine," which says Congress has limited powers to delegate its lawmaking authority to the executive branch.

R. Trent McCotter, counsel for the conservative group Consumers Research, which is challenging the appeal, referred to the fees as "taxation without representation."

"That seems a little bit hollow," Barrett said about the claim, according to Roll Call. "That seems like a meaningless exercise."

Barrett also grilled McCotter on the argument that "the consequences of holding the statute unconstitutional would be devastating for universal service," according to Reuters.

When he said it wasn't relevant to the issue of constitutionality, Barrett said she understood that but added: "I think it's a fair question to consider the consequences of your position."

Earlier this month, Barrett cast a pivotal vote in a March 5 ruling halting the Trump administration's efforts to freeze $2 billion in foreign aid funding. Barrett was joined in the ruling by Roberts and the court's three liberal justices.

Later, after conservative backlash against Barrett, the president came to her defense, calling her a "very good" and "smart" woman.

She and Roberts also broke from the court's other conservatives in Trump's hush-money case involving adult film actress Stormy Daniels, when they allowed Trump's sentencing to proceed after he was convicted by a jury.

Barrett also dissented in the 2024 case Fischer v. United States, which narrowed the scope of the federal obstruction statute used in many prosecutions related to the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot. Trump later pardoned the vast majority of individuals who were convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes in connection to the siege and commuted the sentences of the remaining defendants.

What People Are Saying

Justice Elena Kagan, who was nominated by President Barack Obama, said Wednesday: "This statute has plenty in it that imposes limits on what the FCC is doing."

The Heritage Foundation said: "For an agency to decide its own spending budget, and then continuously adjust its own tax to keep pace with the spending, is an arrangement unlike anything else in the often-carefree annals of federal finance."

What Happens Next

The court is expected to issue its ruling on the case before its current term ends in June.