Net neutrality eviscerated by appeals court ruling

federal net neutrality rules, briefly come back to life Under the Biden administration, Rejected by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.

A three-judge panel ruled that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) does not have the authority to enforce net neutrality rules against Internet service providers (ISPs). The FCC is seeking to reclassify ISPs as public carriers under Title II of the Communications Act to implement policies designed to prevent them from discriminating against different types of network traffic, such as slowing down speeds or blocking content.

But the judges disagreed with the agency’s explanation of how ISPs were classified, and because Chevron respects recent downfalla legal principle that instructs courts to defer to regulators in many circumstances. After the Supreme Court hearing abolished this principle In 2024, courts will be freer to support their own interpretations rather than the judgments of expert bodies. Net neutrality is Immediately considered a prime target to strike No Chevron. While the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld previous net neutrality, a Sixth Circuit judge noted that it relied on Chevron Do this. “Different challenges than those considered in the past for DC circuits Chevronwe no longer respect the FCC’s interpretation of the regulation,” they wrote.

“We recognize that the operation of the Internet is complex and dynamic and that the FCC has substantial expertise in overseeing ‘this technical and complex area,'” the ruling cited earlier decisions. after autumn Chevronit goes on to say, “Such ‘capacity’, if you will, cannot be used to override the plain meaning of the statute.”

This leaves judges free to philosophize about phrases such as “capability to provide” and “information services,” finely parsing how they differ from more tightly regulated telecommunications services. “The facts or ideas that exist in a person’s mind are not ‘information’ like the zeros and ones used by computers,” part of the ruling read. It claims that “speaking reduces thoughts to sounds, writing reduces thoughts to text…During a phone call, one creates an audio message by speaking, which the telephone service transmits to the interlocutor, who in turn responds”, but “to Crucially, the telephony service only transmits content created by the speaker; it does not access the information.

Even before this ruling, net neutrality was in jeopardy The Broadband Industry Association filed a lawsuit against the FCC. The Court of Appeal had has been blocked Net neutrality rules take effect. during oral argument In October, three Republican-appointed judges urged lawyers to properly interpret the Communications Act and respect agency expertise. With President-elect Donald Trump – and under his leadership Net neutrality has been repealed before – With taking office just weeks away, this may be the last we hear about attempts to reclassify broadband providers as common carriers for a while.

FCC Chairman Jessica Rosenworcel called on lawmakers to take responsibility for setting rules to protect the open Internet. “Consumers across the country tell us time and time again that they want a fast, open and fair internet,” she said in a report. statement. “With this decision, it is clear that Congress now needs to heed their calls to take responsibility for net neutrality and enshrine open internet principles into federal law.”

Republican Commissioner Brendan Carr, Trump’s pick to lead the agency after taking office, issued a lengthy statement Called the ruling “a great victory for the country.” He called the net neutrality rules an attempt by the Biden administration to “expand government control over every function of the online ecosystem” and said pushing for the rules was a waste of time. While he was pleased with the ruling, he added that “the work to unwind the Biden administration’s regulatory overreach will continue.”

Former FCC Chairman Ajit Pai led the campaign to repeal the rule during the first Trump administration. Win on X. “For a decade, I have believed that so-called ‘net neutrality’ regulations are illegal (not to mention pointless),” he wrote. “That’s certainly true today in the Sixth Circuit.”