At its March 20, 2009 private conference, the Supreme Court denied most petitions outright, but it postponed a definite decision on three cases, referring them instead to the U.S. Solicitor General for comments. Two of the three cases involved telecommunications companies, including the Sprint PCS v. County of San Diego Case (Docket #08-759). The court order reads:

The Solicitor General is invited to file briefs in these cases expressing the views of the United States.

Glendale Organized Against Cell Towers and other community groups throughout the U.S. have cited a Ninth Circuit Court decision allowing San Diego to enforce its ordinance. Sprint seeks to have the U.S. high court overturn this decision.

San Diego County has fought Sprint PCS on this case in the court system since 2003.

The SCOTUSblog reports:

The U.S. Solicitor General was asked to submit reactions to Level 3 Communications v. St. Louis (08-626) and Sprint Telephony v. San Diego County (08-759), the cases on preemption of local regulation of wireless and fiber optic services. In those cases, two federal Circuit Courts rejected the companies’ argument that the local controls were preempted by federal law — the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The issue in both cases is the scope of a preemption clause in the 1996 Act.

The Ninth Circuit decision upheld San Diego County’s efforts to control cell site installations in residential neighborhoods. Unwilling to let local jurisdictions control or restrict its installations, Sprint has appealed the case (docket link here)to the United States Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court will announce its decision to hear the case, or to let the Ninth Circuit ruling stand, on March 20, 2009.