The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Federal Communications Commission’s Universal Service Fund, ruling 6–3 that the multibillion-dollar program that subsidizes phone and broadband service for low-income households, rural areas, schools and libraries complies with the Constitution. Justice Elena Kagan wrote the opinion for the majority, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, and the Court’s two other liberals. Justices Neil Gorsuch, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented. Created under the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and funded by mandatory contributions from telecommunications carriers, the USF distributes roughly $9 billion a year—costs that most carriers itemize on customer bills. The FCC delegates day-to-day administration to the nonprofit Universal Service Administrative Company, which last year supported 7.5 million low-income households, extended high-speed internet to hard-to-serve areas, and helped tens of thousands of schools, libraries and rural health-care providers. Conservative advocacy group Consumers’ Research and several carriers had argued the arrangement violated the nondelegation doctrine, after the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals concluded Congress had given the FCC—and the FCC in turn a private entity—excessive taxing authority. The Supreme Court rejected that view, finding Congress “sufficiently guided and constrained” the agency and that no impermissible transfer of power occurred. Telecom industry lobby USTelecom called the ruling “a major victory” for millions who rely on affordable connectivity. While the decision secures the fund’s near-term future, both FCC officials and lawmakers signaled that broader reforms may still be needed to ensure the program’s long-term financial sustainability.