I spent some time searching for the decision, and found a bunch of references. This one was interesting, from Canada:
"The judges ruled that the lower court went above and beyond their jurisdiction by ordering that Kucinich be allowed to participate."
This is a media corporation, registered to do business in the state of Nevada. But Nevada courts have no jurisdiction on the actions of that corporation. That's a terrifying precedent. Which state is the NBC corporation registered in? NBC is owned by "NBC Universal", which is owned by General Electric and Vivendi. General Electric is incorporated in the State of New York. Vivendi is a French media conglomerate. So should Kucinich have filed in New York or France?
"Since FCC rules do not apply on cable networks though, MSNBC is allowed to not put him on."
The Federal Communications Commission has no jurisdiction over cable networks?! If true, that needs to change.
Finally found the decision itself:
"The FCA's purpose is to protect the public interest. Under the FCA, primary and exclusive jurisdiction to vindicate this interest ... is vested in the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and the courts' sole function with respect to FCA enforcement is to review final FCC orders under the federal statutory scheme."
So, referring to what I say above, the decision itself enforces the notion that state courts, and even Federal courts, have no jurisdiction over the actions of corporations, only executive branch agencies. Again, this is a terrifying precedent.
The other part of the decision is the "lack of an enforceable contract". The parts of an enforceable contract are "an offer and acceptance, meeting of the minds, and consideration". Give me a break.
This is corporate abuse of power at the deepest level.