Home » Net Neutrality »Public Policy & Gov't »Reuters » Currently Reading:

Trump Administration Can’t Stop States From Enacting Net Neutrality Protection, Court Rules

Phillip Dampier October 1, 2019 Net Neutrality, Public Policy & Gov't, Reuters 3 Comments

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – A U.S. appeals court on Tuesday rejected the decision of the Federal Communications Commission to declare that states cannot pass their own net neutrality laws and ordered the agency to review some key aspects of its 2017 repeal of rules set by the Obama administration.

The court, which upheld most of the FCC’s December 2017 order, said the agency “failed to examine the implications of its decisions for public safety” and must also review how its decision will impact a government subsidy program for low-income users.

The decision means the more than 10-year-old debate over net neutrality will continue to drag on for months or more likely years. The ruling is a setback to the Trump administration’s efforts to reverse rules adopted under former President Barack Obama in 2015 which barred internet service providers from blocking or throttling traffic, or offering paid fast lanes, also known as paid prioritization.

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai said the decision affirmed the FCC’s “decision to repeal 1930s utility-style regulation of the internet. A free and open internet is what we have today. A free and open internet is what we’ll continue to have going forward.”

Pai added that the FCC would address “the narrow issues that the court identified.”

Championed by large tech companies and consumer groups, net neutrality was formally adopted by the FCC in 2015. Major telecommunications companies argued it limited their ability to offer new services to content providers, and under the Trump administration, the FCC overturned the policy.

California passed sweeping state net neutrality protections but agreed not to enforce the measure pending the court challenge.

The court threw out the part of the order that barred all states from setting net neutrality rules and argued that states were preempted by federal law.

“The commission lacked the legal authority to categorically abolish all 50 states statutorily conferred authority to regulate intrastate communications,” the court said.

The FCC could still make “provision-specific arguments” to seek to block individual aspects of state net neutrality rules.

Judge Stephen Williams wrote in his dissenting opinion that “On my colleagues’ view, state policy trumps federal; or, more precisely, the most draconian state policy trumps all else.”

The Trump administration rules were a win for internet providers like AT&T Inc, Comcast Corp and Verizon Communications Inc but opposed by companies such as Facebook Inc, Amazon.com Inc and Alphabet Inc.

Reporting by David Shepardson; Editing by Paul Simao and Lisa Shumaker

3
Leave a Reply

avatar
2 Comment threads
1 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
3 Comment authors
Phillip DampierJohn LodgeL. Nova Recent comment authors

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
L. Nova
Guest
L. Nova

California will win this fight.

John Lodge
Guest
John Lodge

The thing that makes NO SENSE what so ever is Millions of End users, as in John Q Public, think its a great idea to allow Monopoly and Duopoly ISP’s with profits at stake to control what traffic will be allow back and forth to Mr. Public’s devices as well as how fast that traffic is sent back and forth, effectively killing Competition and innovation on the internet.

Search This Site:

Contributions:

Recent Comments:

  • gidget: had 3g, was forced to go to 4glte... it sucks. service sucks, reception sucks and I had to buy a new phone. Verizon sucks...
  • BRING ON THE LAWSUIT: Time Warner / Spectrum problems started on BILL CLINTON'S WATCH....
  • Lynn Salus: Frontier is awful! We pay for 6Mbs and they throttle us down to 1Mbs. We can not get any other service due to where we live so we are stuck with fro...
  • Michael: My usage just doubled this month and I went over my comcast cap. Could my new ring doorbell be the problem?...
  • Pat: I just cancelled everything with them. Got a Consumer Cellular cell phone, unlimited talk for $20+tax. Cheaper than Frontier. Ported my landline num...
  • Phillip Dampier: It very well could be. Sort of a wholesale arrangement sharing branding. No actual new infrastructure seems to be at play here....
  • Ian L: This doesn't sound like they're competing. Just rebranding the other's service so they can offer communications in, say, both San Francisco and Austin...
  • L. Nova: Dan Mcarthy should in jail....
  • L. Nova: The taxpayer is on the hook for these greedy and Wall Street crooked deals....
  • Jason vindas: I hope they closed i try to work with them and they like to hired lazies.fat asses close the doors please...
  • ROBERT THOMAS: I know I'm a little late to the party but I just called the number above. I'm a combined Att/DirecTV customer and they still helped me. Got my extra p...
  • Cindy: I live in Pennsville in Salem County and I guess we don't have a high enough population to get Verizon FiOS. Although like you I also heard that there...

Your Account: