In the 1945 case Ashbacker Radio Corp. v. Federal Communications Commission, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that when two mutually exclusive applications are presented to a regulatory commission such as the FCC, both must be considered concurrently in a hearing before one is granted and another denied. The dispute arose after Ashbacker Radio Corporation and Tribune Company submitted competing applications for radio licenses to the FCC; however, only Tribune's application was reviewed while Ashbacker's was set aside without consideration. The court held that under Section 309 of the Communications Act of 1934, it was necessary for all conflicting applications to be heard together at an evidentiary hearing so as not to disadvantage any party unfairly by granting one license over another without due process.

In the dissenting opinion for Ashbacker Radio Corp. v. Federal Communications Commission, Justice Frankfurter disagreed with the majority's view that comparative hearings were required by law when two mutually exclusive applications were presented to the FCC. He argued that this interpretation of the Communications Act was not supported by its legislative history or text and could potentially lead to unnecessary delays in granting licenses, which would be detrimental to public interest. Furthermore, he contended that it was within FCC’s discretion whether or not a hearing should be held based on each individual case's circumstances rather than being mandated universally whenever there are competing applications.