Reaction to 6th Circuit's Net Neutrality Decision

After the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit struck down the FCC’s net neutrality rules governing internet service providers, the following statements were released:

“Consumers across the country have told us again and again that they want an internet that is fast, open, and fair," said Federal Communications Commission Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel. "With this decision it is clear that Congress now needs to heed their call, take up the charge for net neutrality, and put open internet principles in federal law.”

FCC  Commissioner Anna M. Gomez said, "As I have consistently said, there is a principle at the heart of the Open Internet debate on which we all agree: Broadband access to the Internet is essential for modern life.  I remain convinced that appropriate guardrails are necessary to ensure that this critical service remains accessible and secure for all.  In the wake of the Sixth Circuit’s decision, Congress should act to end this debate and to protect consumers, promote competition and economic leadership, and secure the integrity of our networks.”  

"Today’s decision is a good win for the country.  Over the past four years, the Biden Administration has worked to expand the government’s control over every feature of the Internet ecosystem.  You can see it in the Biden Administration’s efforts to pressure social media companies into censoring the free speech rights of everyday Americans.  You can see it in the Biden Administration’s demand that the FCC adopt ‘digital equity’ rules for the Internet—sweeping regulations that give the Commission nearly limitless powers over the Internet.  And you can see it in the Biden Administration’s decision to impose so-called ‘net neutrality’ rules by applying Title II or utility-style regulations to the Internet. President Biden’s decision to impose these Title II regulations represented a break from the bipartisan consensus established by a Republican Congress and a Democrat President and enshrined in law nearly thirty years ago—a consensus that provided a stable regulatory framework that allowed the Internet in America to flourish.  And President Biden’s entire plan rested on the Chicken Little tactic of persuading Americans that the Internet would break in the absence of these so-called ‘net neutrality’ regulations.  The American people have now seen through that ruse," said FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr.

Andrew Jay Schwartzman, Senior Counsel at the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society, said, "Today’s decision misreads the Telecommunications Act 0f 1996 in finding that broadband internet service is not subject to the regulatory requirements of Title II of the Communications Act.  Among other things, that deprives the FCC of the power to protect national security, insure that competitive broadband suppliers can have access to necessary distribution outlets and endangers wireless access programs for low-income consumers. To reach this result, the panel rejected the statutory analysis of Justice Scalia - the only telecommunications expert ever to sit on the Supreme Court - and found that the “best reading” of the statute does not permit the FCC to regulate internet providers in many important ways.  This is bad for consumers, for businesses that rely on the internet, and for protecting broadband networks from intrusions by nation states. The good news, such as it is, is that the panel rejected two extreme arguments that internet providers had advanced in their appeal.  First, the panel gave a narrow reading to the impact of the recent Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision overruling the Chevron doctrine.  And second, the Court did not rely on the carriers’ “major question doctrine” arguments, so that the FCC will retain the power to regulate various aspects of broadband service without future Congressional action."

"Today's decision represents a major setback for consumers, competition, and the Open Internet. In rejecting the FCC’s authority to classify broadband as a telecommunications service, the court has ignored decades of precedent and fundamentally misunderstood both the technical realities of how broadband works and Congress' clear intent in the Communications Act," said John Bergmayer, Legal Director at Public Knowledge. "Beyond net neutrality, this ruling threatens the FCC's ability to ensure broadband privacy protections, implement ever-more-important public safety measures, fight digital discrimination, promote broadband deployment, and maintain the universal service programs that both connect rural America, and help low-income Americans afford internet service. The court has created a dangerous regulatory gap that leaves consumers vulnerable and gives broadband providers unchecked power over Americans' internet access. We strongly disagree with the court’s reasoning and its misapplication of Supreme Court precedent, including both the Brand X decision and the recent Loper Bright ruling."

"Beyond being a disappointing outcome, today’s 6th Circuit opinion is just plainly wrong at every level of analysis. The decision missed the point on everything from its granular textual analysis and understanding of the broader statutory context, to the court’s view of the legislative and agency history, all the way to its conception of Congress’s overarching policy concerns. Unfortunately, this result also shows why the industry suing the FCC was so eager to engage in forum-shopping to get this case away from the federal court in Washington, D.C. — which had developed deep expertise on broadband issues during prior rounds of litigation.... Today’s decision will let the incoming Trump FCC abdicate its responsibility to protect internet users against unscrupulous business practices. It’s rich to think of Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s hand-picked FCC chairman characterizing light-touch broadband rules as heavy-handed regulation, while scheming to force carriage of viewpoints favorable to Trump on the nation’s broadcast airwaves and social media sites," said Free Press Vice President of Policy and General Counsel Matt Wood.

In a joint statement, the Ohio Telecom Association, USTelecom – The Broadband Association, Ohio Cable Telecommunications Association, NCTA – The Internet & Television Association, CTIA – The Wireless Association, Wireless Internet Service Providers Association, Florida Internet & Television Association, MCTA – The Missouri Internet & Television Association, and Texas Cable Association said, "Today’s ruling confirming that broadband internet access is an ‘information service’ is not only the proper reading of the statute but a victory for American consumers that will lead to more investment, innovation, and competition in the dynamic digital marketplace. Since the birth of the internet, bipartisan Administrations and policymakers have recognized the virtues of a light-touch approach to broadband regulation. Today’s ruling will cement the United States’s position as the world’s most advanced digital marketplace.”

“NTCA has long expressed concern about the application of expansive regulatory regimes to broadband internet access services. We have consistently urged the FCC to address broadband-related public interest goals through carefully tailored policies that are consistent with statutory frameworks, and we have noted that such policies must account for an online ecosystem where consumers’ experiences are affected by not only retail broadband providers but also by content and edge providers and other parties. We hope that today’s decision will allow for a refocused conversation about effective ways to achieve national goals with respect to broadband access,” said the NTCA–The Rural Broadband Association's Executive Vice President Mike Romano.