A federal appeals court on Thursday struck down the Federal Communications Commission's landmark net neutrality rules, ending a nearly two-decade effort to regulate broadband Internet providers as public utilities.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, in Cincinnati, saying The FCC lacked authority to reinstate rules that prevented broadband providers from slowing or blocking access to Internet content. In its opinion, a three-judge panel pointed to a June Supreme Court decision, known as Loper Bright, that overturned a 1984 legal precedent that gave deference to government agencies over regulations.
“Enforcement of Loper Bright means we can put an end to the FCC's dithering,” the court ruled.
The court's decision ended the Biden administration's signature technology policy, which had drawn passionate support from consumer groups and tech giants like Google and fierce protests from telecom giants like Comcast and AT&T.
The FCC voted in April to reinstate net neutrality regulations, which expand government oversight of broadband providers and aim to protect consumers' access to the Internet. The regulations were first implemented nearly a decade ago under the Obama administration and were intended to prevent Internet service providers like Verizon or Comcast from blocking or downgrading the provision of services by competitors like Netflix and YouTube. The rules were repealed during President-elect Donald J. Trump's first administration, but remained a contentious partisan issue pitting tech giants against broadband providers.
Thursday's decision effectively concludes the back-and-forth battle. Brendan Carr, whom Trump has named incoming chairman of the FCC, has been a strong critic of net neutrality. The court's reliance on the Loper case in its ruling could also portend more lawsuits to gut federal regulations at the FCC and other agencies.
The court's opinion “leaves aside an issue that unnecessarily sucked a lot of oxygen out of technology and telecommunications for two decades,” said Evan Swarztrauber, Carr's former political adviser.
In a statement, Carr said he was “pleased” with the decision and that “work to undo the Biden administration’s regulatory overreach will continue.”
The court's decision does not affect state net neutrality laws in California, Washington and Colorado. FCC Democrats on Thursday called on Congress to create laws promoting net neutrality, signaling the problem may continue to worsen.
“Consumers across the country have told us time and time again that they want a fast, open and fair Internet,” said Jessica Rosenworcel, the FCC chairwoman and a Democrat who had pushed for the rules to be reinstated. “It is clear that Congress must now heed their call, take responsibility for net neutrality, and incorporate the principles of an open Internet into federal law.”
Judge Richard Allen Griffin, who wrote Thursday's opinion, said the panel of judges recognized that the Internet was complicated and that the FCC “has significant experience overseeing 'this technical and complex area.'”
But the FCC's interpretation of its authority to define broadband Internet service similar to telephone service exceeded the Telecommunications Act's statutory definitions, he wrote.
“The FCC lacks legal authority to impose the net neutrality policies it wants,” he said.
The term net neutrality was coined in 2003 by Tim Wu, a law professor at Columbia University, who warned that broadband Internet service providers could become gatekeepers of Internet access and block or charge for access. to certain content.
The concept was championed by Google, facebook and Netflix. The companies pressured the FCC to create rules that would prevent preferential treatment of content by Internet service providers.
In 2010, the FCC, under Democratic Chairman Julius Genachowski, created the first proposals for net neutrality rules, generating waves of public interest. The rules sparked street protests, torrents of email comments and even threats of violence against commissioners who opposed the rules.
The complicated, technical issue resonated politically with progressives who saw the rules as a necessary restraint on corporate power and a campaign to keep the Internet open and fair.
But cable and telecommunications companies opposed the rules largely because they viewed them as regulatory overreach. They feared that classifying broadband providers as “common carriers,” like phone companies, would open the door to utility-style regulation and government pricing.
Broadband providers praised the court's decision Thursday. “Our fight to stop the government's misappropriation of the Internet has resulted in a huge victory,” said Grant Spellmeyer, CEO of a small cable trade group, ACA Connects.
In recent years, the issue has lost much of its public momentum. Since then, anger has turned toward social media platforms for spreading misinformation and harming young users. But the battle over regulations continued, with each administration introducing or repealing rules along partisan lines.
“The market doesn't think it's a big deal anymore and hasn't for a while,” said Blair Levin, former FCC chief of staff and NewStreet Research adviser.
