ISPs worry that killing FCC net neutrality rules will come back to haunt them
ISPs are challenging a New York law mandating low-cost broadband, fearing it may lead to more state regulations if FCC rules are overturned, impacting investment and consumer choice in broadband services.
Read original article
ISPs are expressing concerns that the recent revival of net neutrality rules by the FCC could lead to increased state-level regulations, particularly following a New York law mandating a $15-per-month broadband service for low-income residents. Six trade groups representing various telecommunications sectors have petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to invalidate this New York law, arguing that it could set a precedent for other states to impose similar regulations. They contend that if the New York law is upheld while federal regulations are struck down, it could result in a proliferation of rate regulations that would hinder investment in broadband infrastructure. The New York law was previously upheld by the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, which stated that states can regulate in areas where the federal agency lacks authority. The ISPs argue that the federal Communications Act should govern broadband regulation to avoid a fragmented regulatory landscape. The fate of the New York law is closely tied to the FCC's authority, and ISPs are concerned that successful challenges to FCC regulations could lead to more state laws like New York's, which they claim would be detrimental to both providers and consumers.
- ISPs are challenging a New York law requiring low-cost broadband service.
- Concerns arise that state regulations could proliferate if FCC rules are overturned.
- The New York law was upheld by the 2nd Circuit, allowing state regulation in the absence of federal authority.
- ISPs argue that a patchwork of state laws would harm broadband investment and consumer choice.
- The outcome of the case could significantly impact the regulatory landscape for broadband services.
Related
What SCOTUS just did to broadband, right to repair, the environment, and more
The Supreme Court's decision to overturn Chevron deference affects net neutrality, climate regulations, and consumer protections. This ruling challenges agency authority, potentially leading to more legal challenges and regulatory obstacles.
Supreme Court overtrns Chevron impacting net neutrlity, right to repair and more
The Supreme Court's overturning of Chevron deference impacts net neutrality, climate regulations, and consumer protections. Federal agencies may face more judicial scrutiny, hindering rule-making. Challenges are expected in FCC's net neutrality efforts and EPA's climate policies. Regulatory hurdles may arise in tech regulation and market competition.
ISPs seeking government handouts try to avoid offering low-cost broadband
ISPs are contesting a requirement to offer low-cost broadband plans under a $42.45 billion government program, arguing it imposes illegal rate regulations, while some states have approved plans including affordable options.
US Supreme Court ruling on NetChoice cases: What does it mean for Wikipedia?
In July 2024, the US Supreme Court ruled on NetChoice's challenge to Florida and Texas social media laws, sending cases back to lower courts, leaving laws on hold and creating potential legal confusion.
Federal Appeals Court Rules Fair Use May Be Narrowed to Serve Hollywood Profits
The D.C. Circuit Court upheld Section 1201 of the DMCA, limiting fair use and raising concerns about corporate favoritism and government overreach, while the EFF plans to advocate for individual rights.
6 commentsIt's such a vital telecommunication service that the government should give them subsidies to build out networks and provide subsidies to people with low incomes to purchase their services.
But when it comes to regulation, they want to argue that they are no different than Gmail and that neither the states nor the FCC have any authority to impose basic common carrier rules.
That's not even mentioning the oddness that for the sake of wiretapping, ISPs are considered common carriers subject to CALEA and, like phone services, have to use equipment that complies with federally created specs that allow real-time wiretapping.
But unfortunately the federal judiciary is on a campaign to undermine Congress and federal agencies, so we're at the point where the judiciary is saying that the Federal Communications Commission has no jurisdiction over the most important communication system ever invented despite Congress clearly giving it an authority to do so and providing a framework.
With this US Supreme Court, I expect this New York Law will be overruled.
But I believe NY has another option. Tax all ISP revenue (before deductions) over a certain amount at 99% (I wanted to say 100). Those funds could then be distributed to the poor.
In the ACA Case, the US Supreme Court upheld the ACA because part of it was considered a Tax. They said they cannot overrule Tax Policy. So this would be an option for New York and other States.
Related
What SCOTUS just did to broadband, right to repair, the environment, and more
The Supreme Court's decision to overturn Chevron deference affects net neutrality, climate regulations, and consumer protections. This ruling challenges agency authority, potentially leading to more legal challenges and regulatory obstacles.
Supreme Court overtrns Chevron impacting net neutrlity, right to repair and more
The Supreme Court's overturning of Chevron deference impacts net neutrality, climate regulations, and consumer protections. Federal agencies may face more judicial scrutiny, hindering rule-making. Challenges are expected in FCC's net neutrality efforts and EPA's climate policies. Regulatory hurdles may arise in tech regulation and market competition.
ISPs seeking government handouts try to avoid offering low-cost broadband
ISPs are contesting a requirement to offer low-cost broadband plans under a $42.45 billion government program, arguing it imposes illegal rate regulations, while some states have approved plans including affordable options.
US Supreme Court ruling on NetChoice cases: What does it mean for Wikipedia?
In July 2024, the US Supreme Court ruled on NetChoice's challenge to Florida and Texas social media laws, sending cases back to lower courts, leaving laws on hold and creating potential legal confusion.
Federal Appeals Court Rules Fair Use May Be Narrowed to Serve Hollywood Profits
The D.C. Circuit Court upheld Section 1201 of the DMCA, limiting fair use and raising concerns about corporate favoritism and government overreach, while the EFF plans to advocate for individual rights.