On January 8, 2026, the Federal Communications Commission (the “FCC”) announced a settlement with satellite and earth-station operator Marlink for violating national security and law enforcement commitments made to the U.S. government pursuant to a Committee for the Assessment of Foreign Participation in the United States Telecommunications Services Sector (or “Team Telecom”) mitigation agreement. This marks the first time that the FCC has enforced Team Telecom mitigation agreement violations and signals the U.S. government’s expanding reliance on Team Telecom as a tool to protect U.S. national security interests.
According to the FCC’s press release, Marlink’s telecommunications license was conditioned on compliance with a mitigation agreement negotiated by the U.S. Department of Justice (the “DOJ”) on behalf of Team Telecom, an interagency committee responsible for reviewing and assessing the national security and law enforcement risks associated with foreign ownership, control, or influence over telecommunications services and infrastructure in the United States. Marlink failed to seek DOJ approval before allowing foreign employees access to U.S. communications infrastructure and customer information, as required under the agreement. The FCC’s investigation, prompted by a DOJ referral, found that Marlink had not submitted at least 186 foreign employees for DOJ vetting due to an inadequate screening procedure. As part of the settlement, Marlink agreed to pay a $175,000 voluntary contribution to the U.S. Department of the Treasury and implement a robust compliance plan to prevent further unauthorized access.
As FCC Chairman Brendan Carr noted in announcing the settlement, “The FCC and its federal partners are adding real teeth to Team Telecom mitigation agreements. Enforcing these obligations is critical to safeguarding the American people, the domestic economy, and national security.” Indeed, the Marlink enforcement action diverges from the FCC’s historical practice, which has typically been to revoke granted licenses in instances of severe national security concerns. This is perhaps best illustrated by Team Telecom’s 2021 recommendation that the FCC revoke China Telecom (Americas) Corporation’s domestic and international authority to provide telecommunications services in the United States over concerns about the company’s control by the Chinese government.
The enforcement of mitigation agreement violations with respect to Marlink signals the U.S. government’s interest in a more nuanced approach to mitigating national security concerns arising from foreign-owned telecommunications licenses. While the “nuclear option” of pulling licenses remains a viable option—and one we anticipate will continue to be used in instances where Team Telecom has national security concerns related to countries of concern—companies can now expect Team Telecom and the FCC to use a wider set of tools to address mitigation agreement violations.
Notably, the Supreme Court, in Federal Communications Commission et al v. AT&T, Inc., recently granted a petition for certiorari to review whether the FCC’s process for issuing fines under Section 222 of the Telecommunications Act is unconstitutional, following a split among federal appeals courts. Section 222 requires telecommunications carriers to safeguard the sensitive Customer Proprietary Network Information of their customers. The dispute before the Supreme Court arose after major mobile carriers—T-Mobile, AT&T, and Verizon—challenged FCC fines for allegedly failing to properly vet third parties before selling subscriber location data. The disputes center on whether the agency-led penalty system fails to provide a timely jury trial, as required by the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy. Given the national security mandate of the FCC and Team Telecom under Section 1 of the Communications Act, and the contractual basis of any imposed fines, the enforcement of Team Telecom mitigation violations may ultimately be distinguishable from the Telecommunications Act issues being decided by the Supreme Court. However, any ruling striking down the FCC’s current process for imposing fines could provide a basis for challenging FCC Team Telecom fines for mitigation violations. The Supreme Court is set to hear the case in April 2026, with a decision expected in summer 2026.
White & Case means the international legal practice comprising White & Case LLP, a New York State registered limited liability partnership, White & Case LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated under English law and all other affiliated partnerships, companies and entities.
This article is prepared for the general information of interested persons. It is not, and does not attempt to be, comprehensive in nature. Due to the general nature of its content, it should not be regarded as legal advice.
© 2026 White & Case LLP
