Consolidated Edison Case Summary

In 1980, Consolidated Edison Co., one of the largest energy companies in the United States, sought to place a written statement about their support of nuclear energy in the billing envelopes of their customers. However, the Natural Resources Defense Council or NRDC, an environmental advocacy group, felt that customers were a captive audience and should not be subjected to the company’s views. This disagreement led to a filing with the Public Service Commission of NY to have Con Ed’s envelopes opened to contrasting views. In response the Commission prohibited all utility companies from including any political viewpoints in their bill inserts. Con Ed made an appeal to reverse the decision but the appellate court ruled in favor of the commission. However, the ruling was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Issue
The main issue in this case was whether or not Consolidated Edison had constitutional rights. Did Consolidated Edison have the right to give their view? Does the First Amendment extend to monopolies? …show more content…
Which was to be expected, as anything natural would go against their beliefs. I feel that the Commission merely acted swift to try and silence the NRDC, only to end up creating an even bigger issue. I feel that along with the obvious constitutional rights, the U.S. Supreme Court had no other option than ruling in favor of Consolidated Edison. Under the 1st Amendment, they had the liberty to write their view on nuclear power and included it. I think ultimately it was the lack of due process caused the disagreement to escalate. The excuse of a captive audience, which was used when placing the prohibition, held no grounds with the Supreme Court because the audience or customers were not forced to read the message and could have thrown it away. In all, it was undeniable that Consolidated Edison Co. had every right to include the message of their stance on nuclear