Federal Communications Commission v. Florida Power Corp.
480 U.S. 245 · Decided February 25, 1987 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
Federal Communications Commission v. Florida Power Corp. was decided on February 25, 1987 unanimously (9–0). The Court reversed the lower court's decision. Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Due process, takings clause” in the Due Process area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 480 U.S. 245 · 107 S. Ct. 1107 · 94 L. Ed. 2d 282 · 1987 U.S. LEXIS 937
- Docket number
- 85-1658
- Decided
- February 25, 1987
- Argued
- December 3, 1986
- Court era
- Rehnquist Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Reversed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 9–0 (unanimous)
- Majority opinion
- Thurgood Marshall
- Opinion assigned by
- William H. Rehnquist
- How the case arrived
- Appeal
- Issue (SCDB)
- Due process, takings clause
- Issue area
- Due Process
- Legal provision
- Fifth Amendment (takings clause)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Liberal what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Majority | |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Concurrence | Wrote an opinion |
| Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Majority | |
| Justice Sandra Day O'Connor | Concurrence | |
| Justice Antonin Scalia | Majority |
Full case caption
Federal Communications Commission et al. v. Florida Power Corp. et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1986-043, docket 1986-043-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Due process, takings clause”
- Keystone Bituminous Coal Assn. v. Debenedictis
- United States v. Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma
- Hodel v. IrvingLaw held unconstitutional
- First English Evangelical Lutheran Church of Glendale v. County of Los AngelesLaw held unconstitutional
- Nollan et Ux. v. California Coastal Commission
- Macdonald v. County of Yolo
Cases on the same legal provision: Fifth Amendment (takings clause)
- Agins et Ux. v. City of Tiburon
- Gurley v. Rhoden
- City of Pittsburgh v. Alco Parking Corp.
- United States v. Fuller et Ux.
- United States v. Grand River Dam Authority
- General Box Co. v. United States
Same Term, same area (Due Process)
- Asahi Metal Industry Co., Ltd. v. Superior Court of California
- Martin v. Ohio
- Keystone Bituminous Coal Assn. v. Debenedictis
- United States v. Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma
- Brock v. Roadway Express, Inc.
- Hodel v. IrvingLaw held unconstitutional
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error