The U.S. Supreme Court case Federal Communications Commission et al. v. ITT World Communications, Inc., et al., 1983 revolved around the question of whether the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) had jurisdiction over international record carriers' rates for overseas communications services that were not directly related to domestic communication services in the United States. The FCC argued it did have such authority under sections 201(b), 202(a), and 203(a) of the Communication Act of 1934, while ITT World Communications disagreed, asserting these provisions only applied to interstate and foreign communication by wire or radio within or from the United States. In a unanimous decision delivered by Justice William Rehnquist, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of FCC's interpretation that its regulatory power extended beyond just domestic services but also included those international aspects which could affect them indirectly. The court held that this broader understanding was consistent with both legislative history and past judicial interpretations.

In the dissenting opinion for the case Federal Communications Commission (FCC) v. ITT World Communications, Inc., it was argued that the majority's decision to uphold FCC's authority over international record carriers' rates and practices could potentially lead to an excessive concentration of power in a single agency. The dissenters believed this interpretation of Section 201(a) of the Communication Act went beyond what Congress had intended, which was primarily domestic regulation. They also expressed concern about potential conflicts with foreign policy objectives as well as antitrust laws due to this broadened scope of regulatory powers given to FCC by majority’s ruling. Furthermore, they disagreed with how lightly the court treated ITT’s constitutional claims regarding its right against self-incrimination during investigations conducted by FCC under these expanded authorities.