Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. Appeals Court Strikes Down FCC’s Net Neutrality Rules
TVTechnology ^ | 1/2/25 | George Winslow

Posted on 01/02/2025 2:10:06 PM PST by CFW

In a major victory for cable companies and telcos that raises concerns about the Federal Communications Commission's regulatory authority in the wake of recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has struck down the agency’s net neutrality rules.

The rules require broadband operators to treat all internet traffic equally and banned them from giving preferential treatment to some sites by speeding up or slowing down consumer access.

The FCC had implemented net neutrality rules under former President Barack Obama, which were then dropped during the Trump administration. Last April the FCC voted 3-2, along party lines, to reinstate the rules in its "Safeguarding and Securing the Open Internet Order.” Industry groups then sued the FCC to block their implementation.

[snip]

“[U]nlike past challenges that the D.C. Circuit considered under Chevron, we no longer afford deference to the FCC's reading of the statute. Loper Bright Enters. v. Raimondo, 144 S. Ct. 2244, 2266 (2024) (overruling Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984) ) … Using ‘the traditional tools of statutory construction,’ id., we hold that Broadband Internet Service Providers offer only an ‘information service’ under 47 U.S.C. § 153(24), and therefore, the FCC lacks the statutory authority to impose its desired net-neutrality policies through the ‘telecommunications service'’ provision of the Communications Act, id. § 153(51). Nor does the Act permit the FCC to classify mobile broadband—a subset of broadband Internet services—as a ‘commercial mobile service’ under Title III of the Act (and then similarly impose net-neutrality restrictions on those services). Id. § 332(c)(1)(A). We therefore grant the petitions for review and set aside the FCC's Safeguarding Order.”

(Excerpt) Read more at tvtechnology.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Government
KEYWORDS: chevrondoctrine; dubyajudge; fcc; georgewinslow; johnkbush; netneutrality; netneutralityrules; raymondkethledge; richardagriffin; richardallengriffin; richardgriffin; sixthcircuit; speech; trumpjudge
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-29 next last
Good news from the Sixth Circuit. This shows the importance of the cases last term which practically overturned the Chevron doctrine.
1 posted on 01/02/2025 2:10:06 PM PST by CFW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: CFW

“Net Neutrality” sounds like an Internet version of the broadcast media “Fairness Doctrine” that kept conservative voices off the air for decades.


2 posted on 01/02/2025 2:18:15 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum (The worst thing about censorship is █████ ██ ████ ████ ████ █ ███████ ████. FJB.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CFW

Great news if you want your internet provider to have more power over what you access on the internet.


3 posted on 01/02/2025 2:18:52 PM PST by JSM_Liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CFW

interesting.


4 posted on 01/02/2025 2:24:26 PM PST by Kentfromohio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CFW
“Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.”
― Eric Hoffer, The Temper of Our Time

5 posted on 01/02/2025 2:26:59 PM PST by Paal Gulli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JSM_Liberty

“Great news if you want your internet provider to have more power over what you access on the internet.”

The 6th struck down the 3 rats at the FCC that is good enough for me.


6 posted on 01/02/2025 2:27:35 PM PST by gibsonguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CFW

I was checking that pesky constitution thingie, and I can’t find where the power to regulate communication was granted to the fed...


7 posted on 01/02/2025 2:30:30 PM PST by joe fonebone (And the people said NO! The End)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JSM_Liberty
"Great news if you want your internet provider to have more power over what you access on the internet."

---

If it is such an issue then the people can petition their representatives to pass a law which a President can sign into law.

Congress has delegated their jobs to governmental agencies for way too long. For decades, agencies have overstepped their authority and are now making laws that affect our daily lives in serious ways, including taking away our freedoms.

It is fantastic that the Loper ruling is being recognized to rein in the authority of bureaucratic agencies.

8 posted on 01/02/2025 2:39:16 PM PST by CFW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: joe fonebone
> I was checking that pesky constitution thingie, and I can’t find where the power to regulate communication was granted to the fed...

It's right there in Article VIII, right after the section on guaranteeing universal access to Wi-Fi.

9 posted on 01/02/2025 2:39:39 PM PST by dayglored (This is the day which the LORD hath made; we will rejoice and be glad in it. Psalms 118:24)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: CFW; Bob Wills is still the king
6th Circuit opinion, filed January 2, 2025 [appears to be 3-0]:

https://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/25a0002p-06.pdf

Upon Multi-Circuit Petitions for Review of the Federal Communications Commission’s Safegaurding and Securing the Open Internet Order, FCC 24-52.

Argued: October 31, 2024

Decided and Filed: January 2, 2025

Before: GRIFFIN, KETHLEDGE, and BUSH, Circuit Judges.

Richard Allen Griffin	G.W. Bush
Raymond Kethledge	G.W. Bush
John K. Bush            Trump

10 posted on 01/02/2025 2:40:05 PM PST by kiryandil (No one in AZ that voted for Trump voted for Gallego )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CFW
Good news. If you need faster service and your ISP is willing to provide it at an extra cost, it should be an option. Network equipment is expensive. ISPs shouldn't be forced to provide access to higher speed services without compensation for the higher cost.

I pay more for 1 Gbps symmetric fiber service because it helps me do my work more quickly. My next door neighbor is retired and opted for 100 Mbps fiber service from the same ISP at a lower price point. Google fiber just placed their equipment at the foot of my driveway. They offered 8 Gbps symmetric service. I don't need that much bandwidth, so I'll stay with my current ISP and enjoy the reduced monthly bill that occurred when the Google competitor showed up.

11 posted on 01/02/2025 2:45:45 PM PST by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CFW

I want EVERY unlawful regulation REMOVED!


12 posted on 01/02/2025 2:50:42 PM PST by ConservativeMind (Trump: Befuddling Democrats, Republicans, and the Media for the benefit of the US and all mankind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Myrddin
This is exactly the issue. Business that need faster services and are willing to pay for it should be able to do so. The ability of companies to charge those rates and prioritize customers is what finances the expansion of those systems to the benefit of everyone.

If net neutrality becomes the law, improvement and expansion of broadband would slow to a crawl, or have to be financed by the government.

13 posted on 01/02/2025 2:50:55 PM PST by Bruce Campbells Chin ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: CFW

Exactly!


14 posted on 01/02/2025 2:51:15 PM PST by ConservativeMind (Trump: Befuddling Democrats, Republicans, and the Media for the benefit of the US and all mankind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Myrddin
In my neighborhood, we had a fiber company come through. The local cable company charged $80 for 400 Mbit down, 12 Mbit up. The fiber company charges $80 for 1 Gb down and 1 Gb up. Both companies were month to month - no contract.

We turned in our cable modem for fiber and even got $30 off each month for 12 months—again, no contract.

I want cable companies to have severe competition. The cable company was willing to match the cost and the download speed, plus add in cable for free, but the reliability has gone down this past year. It took a standalone fiber company to change the paradigm, and we aren't going back. Who cares about cable TV, anyway, with streaming and the Internet available?

May the Verizons, Comcasts, and Coxes of the world all have to fight for their customers. Local monopolies are still monopolies.

15 posted on 01/02/2025 2:58:16 PM PST by ConservativeMind (Trump: Befuddling Democrats, Republicans, and the Media for the benefit of the US and all mankind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: CFW

The concept of Net Neutrality was created in Silicon Valley about 2008.
To control the message and push Obama’s agenda.
It later mutated into a heap of nonsense to hide the fact that Obama and Holder were behind it.


16 posted on 01/02/2025 3:07:16 PM PST by Zathras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JSM_Liberty

So you think we should live in a Fascist state where the Government allows private business to exist but then regulates every aspect of how they do business?


17 posted on 01/02/2025 3:07:57 PM PST by MNJohnnie (Don't blame me, my congressman is MTG!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeMind

Same here. Non stop issues with the cable connect at the neighborhood hub (which happened to be on my front yard). Despite constant service issue Comcast continually denied it was due to lack of basic maintained being done on infrastructure since the box was put in in 2001. At the same time the costs for service were ridiculously high

The day I saw the work crewed burying new cable in my yard I went out and asked them what it was for. When they told med Google Fiber I asked them how to sign up.

Never going back to anything less. Reliable, speedy and cost effective for what I need.


18 posted on 01/02/2025 3:12:09 PM PST by MNJohnnie (Don't blame me, my congressman is MTG!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Zathras
The concept of Net Neutrality was created in Silicon Valley about 2008. To control the message and push Obama’s agenda. It later mutated into a heap of nonsense to hide the fact that Obama and Holder were behind it.

Actually, we were discussing Net Neutrality in Silicon Valley at least as early as 1989.

19 posted on 01/02/2025 3:52:51 PM PST by PrinceOfCups ("...the inherent virtue of Socialism is the equal sharing of misery" - Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: JSM_Liberty

Yeah, not good.


20 posted on 01/02/2025 5:14:38 PM PST by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-29 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson