A US court has denied the Biden administration's efforts to reinstate net neutrality rules, marking a significant setback for advocates seeking equitable internet access. The ruling highlights the ongoing volatility of internet regulation in the US and prompts calls for Congressional action.
US Court Upholds Repeal of Net Neutrality Regulations
US Court Upholds Repeal of Net Neutrality Regulations
Major defeat for net neutrality advocates as court rules against restoring protections.
In a landmark decision, a US court has chosen to reject the Biden administration's attempt to reinstate what are commonly known as net neutrality rules, determining that federal authority to regulate internet service providers (ISPs) as public utilities is lacking. This ruling represents a critical defeat for advocates of an open internet who have long campaigned for regulations mandating that ISPs, such as AT&T, treat all legal content on the internet equally.
The net neutrality rules were first implemented during President Barack Obama's administration by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) but were subsequently repealed during the tenure of President Donald Trump. The recent ruling arrives just as Trump prepares to initiate his second term in office, effectively concluding a protracted legal struggle over net neutrality that spans several administrations.
Judges indicated in their ruling that administrations have oscillated on the net neutrality issue, yet they noted that they no longer need to accept the FCC's interpretation of the law, following a recent Supreme Court decision that curbs the authority of federal agencies in interpreting legislation. "The precedent set in Loper Bright allows us to curtail the FCC's inconsistencies," stated the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Brendan Carr, a Republican FCC member selected by Trump to lead the agency, welcomed the court's decision, declaring it a rebuke of what he termed the Biden administration's "Internet power grab." In contrast, Jessica Rosenworcel, the outgoing Democratic commissioner of the FCC, expressed disappointment, underscoring that consumers across the nation have repeatedly voiced their desire for a fast, open, and fair internet. "This ruling clearly indicates that Congress must now address net neutrality and establish federal protections for the open internet," she urged.
The debate on net neutrality had been a fierce topic in American politics, pitting internet providers against large technology firms such as Google and Netflix. It gained considerable public attention when comedian John Oliver rallied his viewers to advocate for the regulations, leading to an overwhelming number of public comments that overloaded the government's website. However, the urgency surrounding the issue has diminished since its 2018 repeal.
Thursday's ruling does not impact state-level net neutrality laws, where some regions maintain similar protections. Nevertheless, many advocates contend that having national rules is essential to prevent ISPs from throttling specific content or charging extra for faster service delivery.
The progressive internet policy organization, Public Knowledge, criticized the decision for significantly weakening the FCC's capacity to enforce privacy and safety measures, asserting that the court mistakenly classified internet service providers exclusively as "information services" rather than telecommunications entities. "This ruling creates a precarious regulatory void that exposes consumers and grants ISPs unchecked authority over internet access in the US," the group proclaimed.
Conversely, USTelecom, an industry coalition comprising members like AT&T and Verizon, hailed the ruling as a "victory for American consumers," asserting that it would stimulate increased investment, innovation, and competition in the ever-evolving digital marketplace.
