Neutered: Federal court strikes down FCC authority to impose net neutrality rules
What just happened? The net neutrality saga is effectively over following a federal appeals court ruling this week, unless Congress decides to revisit the debate. Given the current political climate, that seems improbable, and the Trump administration is unlikely to revive the cause.
The Federal Communications Commission’s long-standing effort to establish stronger oversight of the internet was dealt a decisive blow this week when the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the FCC lacks the authority to regulate wireless and home broadband services under the same set of rules that have traditionally governed telephone service.
The court’s decision hinged on the recent Supreme Court ruling that overturned the Chevron deference, a precedent that had previously granted federal agencies significant leeway in interpreting ambiguous statutory language. This ruling significantly curtailed the FCC’s ability to implement and enforce net neutrality regulations.
Net neutrality, a principle that advocates for equal treatment of all internet traffic, has been a contentious issue in American politics for over a decade. The concept aims to prevent internet service providers from favoring certain websites or services over others – a practice that could potentially stifle competition and innovation.
The Obama administration introduced robust net neutrality rules in 2015, which were subsequently repealed in 2017 under the Trump administration. In 2021, President Biden signed an executive order calling for the reinstatement of these regulations. The FCC, under the leadership of Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel, voted to restore net neutrality rules in 2024.
The Sixth Circuit Court’s decision effectively nullifies the FCC’s Safeguarding Order, which would have reinstated net neutrality regulations. The court declared that broadband internet service providers offer only an “information service” as defined under current US law, and therefore, the FCC lacks the statutory authority to impose net neutrality policies through the “telecommunications service” provision of the Communications Act.
Furthermore, the court ruled that the FCC cannot classify mobile broadband as a “commercial mobile service,” which would have allowed the agency to impose net neutrality regulations on those services. The Sixth Circuit explicitly cited the absence of Chevron deference in its ruling, stating that they no longer afford deference to the FCC’s interpretation of the statute.
In response to the court’s decision, Rosenworcel called on Congress to enshrine net neutrality principles in federal law – an acknowledgment that the FCC’s regulatory efforts have reached an impasse.
On the other hand, Republican FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr, who is set to become the agency’s chair later this month, praised the court’s ruling. Carr criticized the Biden administration’s approach, stating that their plan relied on “persuading Americans that the internet would break in the absence of these so-called ‘net neutrality’ regulations.”
As for the future of net neutrality, the ball is now in Congress’s court. However, given the current political landscape and the other pressing issues facing the government, it remains uncertain whether Congress will take up this challenge. With Carr poised to take the helm, it also seems unlikely that the agency will pursue further regulatory action on net neutrality.
