CPAC, one of the nation's leading conservative organizations, formally entered a high-stakes federal court battle over media consolidation, filing an amicus brief Saturday backing Newsmax and a coalition of state cable associations challenging the Federal Communications Commission's approval of the $6.2 billion Nexstar-TEGNA merger.
The case, now before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, centers on whether the FCC unlawfully waived long-standing broadcast ownership limits to approve Nexstar's acquisition of TEGNA.
The appellants asked the federal court to issue an emergency order staying the case.
CPAC's Center for Regulatory Freedom, in its amicus filing, argues that the FCC overstepped its statutory authority and failed to justify the merger under the required "public interest" standard.
The brief aligns closely with arguments already advanced by Newsmax and six state broadband associations, while adding a broader constitutional and administrative law critique.
At the core of CPAC's argument is that the FCC lacks legal authority to waive the national television ownership cap set by Congress.
That cap, first created by President Ronald Reagan — which is currently 39% of U.S. television households — was codified in federal law and, CPAC argues, deliberately placed beyond the agency's discretionary reach.
"The statutory language is unambiguous," the brief contends, emphasizing that Congress required the FCC to impose the cap and removed it from the agency's periodic review process.
By doing so, lawmakers signaled that the limit is mandatory and not subject to waiver.
CPAC argues that the FCC's reliance on its general waiver authority is misplaced.
While agencies may waive their own rules for "good cause," the brief states, they cannot override explicit congressional mandates.
Doing so would violate both the Administrative Procedure Act and fundamental separation-of-powers principles.
The filing also invokes the Supreme Court's 2024 decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which curtailed judicial deference to agency interpretations of statutes.
CPAC argues that under this framework, courts must independently interpret the law — and reject agency actions that exceed statutory limits.
The legal challenge comes amid broader criticism of how the FCC handled the merger approval.
According to court filings, the FCC's Media Bureau approved the transaction late last week, and Nexstar announced the deal had closed just minutes later.
Opponents say the speed of the approval deprived them of meaningful judicial review and deviated from the FCC's typical 180-day timeline for complex mergers.
They also argue that the decision was improperly made at the bureau level rather than by the full Commission.
Newsmax CEO Christopher Ruddy sharply criticized the move, calling it "an affront to both legal process and the rule of law."
CPAC's brief does not focus heavily on procedural timing but reinforces the broader claim that the FCC acted beyond its delegated authority — particularly in addressing what it describes as "novel questions of law" involving statutory limits on ownership.
Even if the FCC had authority to grant waivers, CPAC argues, the agency failed to demonstrate that doing so serves the public interest — a key legal requirement for approving broadcast transactions.
The brief identifies two major shortcomings: inadequate analysis of competition and failure to assess the impact on viewpoint diversity.
On competition, CPAC criticizes the FCC for relying on general observations about the modern media landscape — such as the rise of streaming platforms — without providing empirical evidence.
The agency, the brief says, failed to meaningfully examine how increased consolidation among broadcast station owners affects market dynamics.
The filing also echoes arguments raised by cable and pay TV groups regarding retransmission leverage.
As broadcasters grow larger, CPAC argues, they gain increased power in negotiations with cable and satellite providers — power that can be used to demand higher fees or favor affiliated channels. Such costs are typically passed on to consumers.
DIRECTV, which has also joined the legal challenge, warned in its own filing that the combined Nexstar entity could reach more than 80% of U.S. households and exert significant pricing pressure on distributors, potentially raising consumer costs.
A central theme of CPAC's brief is the potential impact of consolidation on ideological diversity in media.
CPAC argues that the FCC failed to analyze how increased national reach by a single broadcaster could affect smaller or independent outlets, particularly those offering alternative political perspectives.
"The public will not benefit from the creation of a few massive conglomerates," the filing states, warning that consolidation could lead to "viewpoint homogenization under the banner of market efficiency."
The case has quickly drawn national attention, with a coalition of eight state attorneys general filing a parallel lawsuit in California seeking to halt the merger on antitrust grounds.
Meanwhile, more than 40 House Republicans have questioned the FCC's authority to alter or bypass the ownership cap.
"The FCC cannot disregard statutory text to pursue its desired policy outcomes," the brief concludes, urging the court to block the merger and vacate the agency's waiver.
© 2026 Newsmax. All rights reserved.