J.D., cum laude, University of Michigan Law School
B.A., University of Michigan
Executive Technology Editor and Editorial Board, Michigan Telecommunications and Technology Review
Bar and Court Admissions
District of Columbia Bar
Supreme Court of the United States
U.S. Courts of Appeals for the First, Fourth, Sixth, Eighth, Ninth, and District of Columbia Circuits
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
Josh represents clients in proceedings before the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), and other federal agencies, as well as in federal and state court actions. In addition to regularly advocating in front of federal agencies, Josh argues in federal appellate court as well as in federal district court and state court.
- Represents clients in matters involving FCC and state regulation of wireless and wireline telecommunications services, including commercial mobile radio service (both voice and data), TCPA, broadband services such as cable and fiber, competitive provision of video services, and satellite services.
- Provides counseling on compliance with evolving regulation of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS, or more commonly, drones); tracks and analyzes (a) Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) rulemakings and enforcement actions, and (b) state and local regulation of UAS, with a particular focus on potential conflicts between different regulatory authorities.
- Specializes in federal appellate review of FCC decisions and both prosecution and defense of federal district court actions involving communications law.
- Represents companies with communications law disputes in state and federal courts across the country.
- Particular experience in actions involving federal preemption of state regulation of wireless carriers, defense of radiofrequency emissions claims, wireless facility siting issues, and rights-of-way regulation.
- Provides large telecommunications carriers with national strategic legal advice on a variety of issues.
- Assists clients with federal and state regulation of investment and transfers of control in the telecommunications industry, including structuring the transactions and gaining the necessary regulatory approvals.
- Negotiates institutional and enterprise contracts for telecommunications services.
- Successfully defended binding nature of arbitration clause contained in online customer contract, resulting in the stay of a large class-action lawsuit.
- Representative matters include:
- Montgomery County, MD v. US, No 15-1240 (4th Cir.): Represents Intervenor CTIA in defending the FCC’s Infrastructure Order, which interprets and implements limitations on local authority to deny wireless facility siting requests.
- State of Tennessee v. FCC, No. 15-3291 (6th Cir.): Represents the State of Tennessee in a challenge to the FCC’s rules prohibiting states from regulating broadband provision by their municipalities.
- Sprint Spectrum et al. v. Zoning Board of Adjustment of Paramus, No. 14-2954 (3d Cir.): Represented T-Mobile in an appeal of a denial of a wireless siting application; the Third Circuit affirmed the finding below that a Distributed Antenna System would not be a viable alternative to the proposed site.
- Lenfest v. Verizon Enterprises, No. 13-cv-11596 (D. MA): Successfully defended binding nature of arbitration clause contained in online customer contract, resulting in the stay of a large class-action lawsuit.
- CTIA v. City and County of San Francisco, No. 11-17707 (9th Cir.): Represented the wireless industry in a major First Amendment and preemption challenge to the City of San Francisco’s requirement that retailers display health warnings at the point of sale for wireless phones. The team succeeded in securing an injunction against enforcement of San Francisco’s law from the Ninth Circuit.
- New York SMSA L.P. d/b/a Verizon Wireless et al. v. Town of Clarkstown: In a major victory for wireless carriers, the Second Circuit affirmed a lower court decision finding that a local ordinance that legislated a preference for alternate technologies, including Distributed Antenna Systems, and regulated radio frequency (RF) interference was preempted by federal law under a field preemption theory.
- Farina v. Nokia et al.: The Third Circuit affirmed a lower court decision dismissing class action claims tied to the alleged health effects of RF emissions from wireless devices; representing Verizon Wireless, Josh was part of a national team of counsel representing a cross-section of the wireless industry.
- Murray v. Motorola: On behalf of a group of wireless carriers and manufacturers, including Verizon Wireless and Nokia, the D.C. Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal of a number of injury claims involving allegations of injury caused by RF emissions from wireless devices and systems.
- BellAtlantic Mobile of Rochester, d/b/a Verizon Wireless v. Town of Irondequoit, one of the first decisions applying the FCC’s Shot Clock following the affirmance of that order by the Fifth Circuit, the court found that the town had unreasonably delayed in failing to grant the carrier’s application and that the application of environmental review was a mere pretext.
- Globalstar, Inc. v. FCC: The D.C. Circuit affirmed an FCC decision to reassign certain spectrum used for mobile satellite services from Globalstar, Inc. to Iridium Satellite LLC. Argued on behalf of Iridium.
- National Cable & Telecommunications Association, et. al. v. FCC: The D.C. Circuit affirmed an FCC decision to ban exclusive access provisions in agreements between cable companies and the owners of apartment buildings and other multiple dwelling units.
- Hartleib et al. v. FCC: Represented Sirius XM Radio Inc. as intervenor in appeals challenging the FCC’s approval of the merger of Sirius XM Radio Inc. In dismissing the appeals, the D.C. Circuit held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the FCC’s decision because the petitioners lacked standing.
- PRT v. Municipality of Guayanilla: The First Circuit handed down a decision affirming a grant of summary judgment in favor of Puerto Rico Telephone Company. The case involved a federal court challenge to a municipality’s 5% gross revenue fee under Section 253 of the Communications Act. The case constituted the first Circuit-level precedent defining the limits on municipal authority to condition access to public rights-of-way on the payment of “gross revenue fees” under a part of the Communications Act enacted by the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
- Balthazar, et al. v. Verizon Hawaii Inc.: In a large putative class action alleging that Verizon Hawaii violated the Hawaii consumer protection laws in marketing its Touch Calling service, the Supreme Court of the State of Hawaii affirmed a decision granting summary judgment for Verizon Hawaii, Inc.
- Jaeger v. Cellco Partnership: The Second Circuit affirmed a lower court decision rejecting an attempt by an abutting property owner to block construction of wireless facilities based on alleged health effects of RF emissions on humans and avian wildlife.
- Federal Communications Bar Association (FCBA)
- Named a “Legal Lion” by Law360’s Weekly Verdict Column (2016)
- Named one of DC's "Super Lawyers" for Communications by Super Lawyers magazine (2013-2017)
- Named by The Legal 500 US as a "recommended lawyer" in Telecom and Broadcast Regulatory Law (2011-2013)
- Named to Legal Times' list of the DC-area's "40 under 40" (2009)
News & Insights
- July 1, 2017 | ArticleNatural Gas & Electricity
- June 2017 | Newsletter
- May 19, 2017 | Alert
- April 24, 2017 | Alert
- March 23, 2017 | Article
- February 23, 2017 | ArticleBusiness and Commercial Litigation in Federal Courts, Fourth EditionThomson Reuters and American Bar Association Section of Litigation
- February 14, 2017 | ArticleLaw360
- January 27, 2017 | Press Release
- January 6, 2017 | Las Vegas, NV | Speaking EngagementConsumer Electronics Show 2017Joshua S. Turner, Speaker
- December 27, 2016 | AlertFCC Seeks Data and Comment About Ways to Streamline and Expedite Local Approval of Small Cell Wireless Infrastructure Deployment
- December 22, 2016 | ArticleLaw360
- December 16, 2016 | Press ReleaseWiley Rein Files Supreme Court Amicus Brief in Lee v. Tam on Behalf of Rutherford Institute and Consumers’ Research
- December 2016 | ArticleBusiness and Commercial Litigation in Federal Courts: Communications Litigation, Fourth EditionThomson Reuters
- November 4, 2016 | Alert
- October 21, 2016 | Alert
- September 21, 2016 | Alert
- September 7, 2016 | ArticleWileyConnectJoshua S. Turner
- September 2, 2016 | Alert
- August 11, 2016 | ArticleUAS Vision
- August 10, 2016 | Press Release
- August 5, 2016 | Hot Springs, VA | Speaking EngagementThe West Virginia Bar Association's 130th Annual MeetingJoshua S. Turner, Speaker
- August 2, 2016 | Press ReleaseWiley Rein Participates in First-Ever White House OSTP Workshop on Drones and the Future of Aviation
- June 22, 2016 | Alert
- May 11, 2016 | ArticleLaw360
- May 4, 2016 | Alert
- May 2, 2016 | New Orleans, LA | Speaking EngagementAUVSI's XPONENTIAL 2016Joshua S. Turner, Speaker
- April 26, 2016 | ArticlePOLICYBERJoshua S. Turner, Scott D. Delacourt
- April 15, 2016 | Press Release
- March 30, 2016 | Alert
- March 21, 2016 | Press ReleaseWiley Rein Argues on Behalf of Tennessee in High-Profile Sixth Circuit Case Involving FCC’s Attempt to Preempt State Rules on Municipal Broadband
- February 5, 2016 | Media MentionBloomberg BNA’s Daily Report for Executives
- December 22, 2015 | Press ReleaseWiley Rein Helps Secure First Amendment Win Striking Down Ban on Registering ‘Disparaging’ Trademarks
- December 18, 2015 | Alert
- December 18, 2015 | AlertMegan L. Brown, Joshua S. Turner
- December 18, 2015 | Press Release
- November 6, 2015 | Press ReleaseWiley Rein Files Amicus Brief in First Amendment Trademark Case, Pro-Football, Inc. v. Amanda Blackhorse
- October 6, 2015 | Alert
- September 21, 2015 | Media MentionLaw360
- July 13, 2015 | Alert
- June 22, 2015 | Press ReleaseWiley Rein Files Amicus Brief Testing the Constitutionality of the Lanham Act’s Bar on “Disparaging” Trademarks
- June 19, 2015 | Alert
- April 23, 2015 | Press Release
- April 22, 2015 | Press Release
- March 29, 2015 | Press Release
- March 13, 2015 | Article
- January 14, 2015 | ArticleSupreme Court Holds that Denials of Cell Tower Siting Applications Must Be Accompanied by Written Reasons
- December 9, 2014 | ArticleUnmanned Aerial Online
- November 20, 2014 | Article
- November 18, 2014 | AlertNTSB Reverses ALJ Decision in Pirker; Finds that Unmanned Aircraft are “Aircraft” and Governed by FAA RulesJoshua S. Turner
- October 27, 2014 | Article
- October 1, 2014 | Press Release
- August 25, 2014 | Alert
- August 1, 2014 | Media MentionLaw360, Fortune
- July 23, 2014 | Media MentionForbes
- June 19, 2014 | Media MentionJoshua Turner Featured in Q&A with Bloomberg BNA on Cell Tower Siting CaseBloomberg BNA
- June 2014 | ArticleThe Metropolitan Corporate Counsel Vol. 22, No. 6Joshua S. Turner
- May 15, 2014 | ArticleLaw360
- May 13, 2014 | Press Release
- May 2014 | Newsletter
- April 25, 2014 | Press Release“Super Lawyers” Recognizes 66 Wiley Rein Attorneys in Washington, DC Area Across 18 Areas of the Law
- March 14, 2014 | Media MentionJoshua Turner Weighs in on Continued FAA Commercial Drone Ban; Path Needed to Allow Safe and Responsible UseLaw360
- March 11, 2014 | ArticleLaw360
- March 10, 2014 | Washington, DC | Speaking EngagementFederal Communications Bar Association CLE ProgramJoshua S. Turner, Moderator, Eve Klindera Reed, Speaker
- February 20, 2014 | ArticleLaw360
- February 14, 2014 | Press Release
- February 3, 2014 | ArticleBloomberg BNA's Telecommunications Law Resource Center
- November 21, 2013 | Alert
- September 6, 2013 | AlertFCC Receives Comments on Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and Notice of Inquiry Assessing Radiofrequency Exposure Standards and Policies
- June 20, 2013 | Press ReleaseSupreme Court Rejects Funding Condition Requiring Affirmation of Belief, as Urged by Wiley Rein Attorneys
- June 7, 2013 | Press ReleaseThe Legal 500 US Ranks Wiley Rein’s Telecommunications Group in the Top Tier for the Seventh Consecutive Year
- June 4, 2013 | Press ReleaseLegal 500 US Recognizes 25 Wiley Rein Lawyers Across Five Practices Nationally; Wiley and Senkowski Are "Leading Lawyers"
- May 17, 2013 | Press Release
- April 19, 2013 | Press Release
- April 8, 2013 | AlertSummary of the First Report and Order, Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, and Notice of Inquiry In the Matter of Reassessment of Federal Communications Commission Radiofrequency Exposure Limits and Policies and Proposed Changes in the Commission's Rul
- April 4, 2013 | Press Release
- February 28, 2013 | Press Release
- September 11, 2012 | Press Release
- August 13, 2012 | Alert
- June 2012 | Newsletter
- June 6, 2012 | Press ReleaseThe Legal 500 US Ranks Wiley Rein's Telecommunications Group in the Top Tier for the Sixth Consecutive Year
- May 30, 2012 | Press ReleaseThe Legal 500 US Ranks Four Wiley Rein Practices Among Nation's Best; Wiley and Senkowski Named 'Leading Lawyers'
- March 19, 2012 | ArticleThe National Law Journal
- February 22, 2012 | Alert
- February 3, 2012 | Alert
- February 1, 2012 | Press Release
- December 15, 2011 | ArticleProduct Liability Law360
- November 28, 2011 | Press Release
- October 28, 2011 | Press Release
- October 20, 2011 | Press Release
- June 6, 2011 | Press Release
- June 1, 2011 | Press ReleaseThe Legal 500 US Names Wiley Rein's Bankruptcy, Copyright and Telecom Practices Among the Best in the Nation; Wiley and Senkowski Honored as "Leading Lawyers"
- July 1, 2010 | Press ReleaseWiley Rein Attorneys Obtain Second Circuit Affirmance of Major Victory for Wireless Carriers Preempting Local Government Preference for Particular Technologies
- July 13, 2009 | Press Release
- May 28, 2009 | Press ReleaseWiley Rein Attorneys Assist in Attaining Important Ruling Affirming Ban on Exclusive Cable Contracts
- March 30, 2009 | Press ReleaseWiley Rein Attorneys Secure Major Victory for Wireless Carriers Preempting Local Government Preference for Particular Technologies
- August 27, 2007 | Press ReleaseWiley Rein Secures Major Victory for Wireless Carriers and Equipment Manufacturers in Cases Alleging Cell Phone Emissions Cause Injury
- December 29, 2006 | Press Release
- June 9, 2006 | Press Release
- November 28, 2005 | Press ReleaseWRF Successfully Defends Grant of Summary Judgment in $300 Million Class Action; Litigation Establishes Important Filed-Rate Doctrine Precedent in Hawaii Supreme Court
- August 10, 2005 | Press ReleaseWRF Selected as Lead Counsel in Country's Most Important Wireless Telecom Case Before the U.S. Supreme Court
- January 28, 2005 | Press Release
- August 4, 2004 | Press Release
- August 29, 2003 | Press Release