PRESS RELEASE



   Schneller Campaign files Petition with Supreme Court of United States Appealing from Decisions of the Federal Communication Commission and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals over Exclusion from October 2010 debate by WCAU10.



Thursday, July 27, 2011    7:00 PM (EST)
Contact : Press office | 610-688-9471 | ballotnow@aol.com


    The Jim Schneller for Congress Committee has filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court of the United States seeking appeal of a decision of the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals which declined jurisdiction over appeal from a Federal Communications Commisssion decision, and affirmed dismissal of a concurrent case in the U.S. Eastern District of Pennsylvania District Court.  

The F.C.C. decision, issued weeks after it's filing, found that omission of Jim Schneller from the October 3, 2010 @Issue PA-7 debate was not a deprival of equal time nor free speech  warranting F.C.C. intervention.   The F.C.C., among their errors, ignored the fact that the show was a station-sponsored debate, so that it did not fall within the categories of show exempt from equal time requirements.

The Schneller campaign had quickly filed the case in the District Court because the F.C.C. was refusing prompt action for resolution of the complaint, which was requested to occur prior to the debate and prior to election.  Debate  inclusion, or equal time (at some time other than the debate), were validly requested, because remedies that are set out in the laws of Congress are appropriate under circumstances like existed in this case.   Schneller has claimed that the F.C.C. approaches political cases tepidly, avoids real issues in their decisions, and is, in many ways, simply not addressing core problems that are urgent and controversial.

The Third Circuit appeal was filed because the district court ignored the fact that the F.C.C. was dragging it's feet, and avoided in entirety the claims of conspiracy regarding WCAU and candidates Meehan and Lentz, while deciding against principles of free speech and equal time. 

Before the Third Circuit decision was issued, the F.C.C. handed down their decision, and the Schneller campaign immediately requested the Third Circuit to include that decision in the appeal.   The appeal was requested to address questions including why dismissal had occurred when valid Free Speech and equal time claims were present, whether the defendants had conspired to inflict a long term blow to Jim Schneller's reputation, and review of the district court's failure to, at the very least, transfer the case for trial in state court on the state law claims.

The Third Circuit, openly omitting many important issues, found erroneously that no First Amendment claim and no equal time claim had been stated, and concluded that Mr. Schneller had appealed the F.C.C. prematurely, because he should have first appealed the F.C.C. decision, which had been issued by the Political Programming Branch, to the Federal Communications Commission commissioners first.

Schneller now asks the United States Supreme Court :

1.Has the Schneller campaign stated a valid claim for conspiracy to violate the candidate's civil rights, and wasn't the District Court required to send this and/or the free speech and conspiracy claims to trial rather than let them "fall through the cracks" ?

2. Whether direct appeal from the F.C.C. Political Programming Branch  decision was appropriate because it is an immediately appealable  collateral order, because the rights being lost otherwise would be dissipated and moot, and no real effort was made by the F.C.C. to bring the meaningful, timely resolution intended by law.

3. Did the Third Circuit and the District Court abuse discretion, in avoiding the merits of the candidate's claim for equal time and infringements on basic rights, and denying injunction -  these occurring to the direct perception by the public of the Courts' and the Agency's partiality amd irregularity in the most sensitive of subjects : elections ?

   The Schneller campaign continues their claims of pronounced infringement by NBC 10 and candidates Meehan and Lentz on candidate  Schneller's first amendment rights, as well as the people's rights to integrity of the election process, which has been dealt numerous setbacks by the two-party bloc and their allies as of late.   Also claimed is the obvious but court-avoided fact that NBC10-Philadelphia unfairly intended to affect the election.

   Schneller comments: "The Courts and the FCC have established a narrow scope for equal time and free speech liability of the media in elections.  When a case falls within these interpretations of law, which are already over-stringent, the Courts and F.C.C. should live by their rules and prior decisions.  This campaign will not fall victim to arbitrary and unconstitutional oppression without a fight, and we have included the other candidates as co-conspirators with WCAU, in order that the real circumstances will be part of the case.


   U.S. District Court Eastern Pennsylvania No. 10-5081

   U.S. Court of Appeals Third Circuit No. 10-3944  

   U.S. Supreme Court Petition No. 11-54