{"id":46399,"date":"2025-01-10T14:36:55","date_gmt":"2025-01-10T19:36:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mjtsai.com\/blog\/?p=46399"},"modified":"2025-01-10T14:36:55","modified_gmt":"2025-01-10T19:36:55","slug":"network-neutrality-not-reinstated","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mjtsai.com\/blog\/2025\/01\/10\/network-neutrality-not-reinstated\/","title":{"rendered":"Network Neutrality Not Reinstated"},"content":{"rendered":"

Bruce Crumley<\/a> (via Hacker News<\/a>):<\/p>\n

The increasing challenge to government agencies’ authority to regulate <\/a>businesses gained momentum this week, after an appeals court suspended application of the Federal Communications Commission<\/a>‘s (FCC) ruling restoring net neutrality<\/a>. That stay effectively delays the court’s decision in the case until after November’s elections. No matter the results of those, however, its final fate may well be decided by the Supreme Court–whose previous rulings facilitated attacks on federal agencies<\/a> in the first place.<\/p>

[…]<\/p>

The prohibition on ISPs offering faster services to corporate customers and individuals willing to pay more for the privilege was first imposed by the Obama Administration, revoked under Donald Trump’s presidency, then reauthorized by the FCC in April on the orders of President Joe Biden.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n

Brandon Vigliarolo<\/a>:<\/p>\n

The decision<\/a> from the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, filed today, formally killed the FCC’s April order<\/a> that once again classified internet service providers as common carriers required to be impartial in the offering of their services regardless of what a customer was doing online.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n

David Shepardson<\/a>:<\/p>\n

The court cited the Supreme Court’s June decision<\/a> in a case known as Loper Bright to overturn a 1984 precedent that had given deference to government agencies in interpreting laws they administer, in the latest decision to curb the authority of federal agencies.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n

Ben Lovejoy<\/a>:<\/p>\n

The FCC had acted in response to calls from Apple<\/a> and more than 40 other tech companies<\/a> to safeguard equal treatment for all.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n

Meg James<\/a> (via Slashdot<\/a>):<\/p>\n

Despite the dismantling of the Federal Communications Commission’s efforts to regulate broadband internet service, state laws in California, New York and elsewhere remain intact.<\/p>

[…]<\/p>

In fact, some suggested that the Cincinnati-based 6th Circuit’s decision — along with other rulings and the U.S. Supreme Court’s posture on a separate New York case — has effectively fortified state regulators’ efforts to fill the gap.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n

Previously:<\/p>\n