The United States Supreme Court last week denied an appeal of a Second Circuit decision by Cablevision that challenged the underlying legality of must carry rules. The case stems from a dispute regarding carriage of WRNN-TV, a station licensed in Kingston, N.Y. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) ruled in 2007 that Cablevision had to offer WRNN programming to local cable subscribers in accordance with must-carry requirements. The Second Circuit upheld that ruling, and Cablevision, supported by other cable systems and programmers, filed for Supreme Court review.

Cablevision had argued that changes in the paid video marketplace – specifically the rise of satellite television – undercut the "cable as bottleneck" rationale relied upon in earlier Supreme Court decisions that upheld the must-carry rules. Cablevision also argued that must-carry rules violate the First Amendment. U.S. Solicitor General and Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan argued against Cablevision, saying that increased capacity on most cable systems militates against a change to the rules: “The requirement that some channels be devoted to carriage of local broadcast stations is much less burdensome than it was when the must-carry provisions were previously sustained against constitutional attack,” Kagan wrote.

NAB Executive Vice President Dennis Wharton said the Supreme Courts rejection of the Cablevision petition was "a great day for the millions of Americans who rely on the diverse line-up of programming supplied by free and local broadcasters. By denying the cable-backed petition for review, the Supreme Court validates NAB's longstanding assertion that must-carry rules protect the public's access to niche broadcast programming, including foreign language, religious and independent TV stations."