Vox

Federal law seeks to make communications technology like telephones and the internet, in the words of one older statute, “available, so far as possible, to all the people of the United States.” A longstanding federal program that seeks to implement this goal is now before the Supreme Court, in a case known as FCC v. Consumers’ Research, and the stakes could be enormous.

The White House is working to “improve Wi-Fi connectivity,” according to White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt. According to The New York Times, it’s using Starlink to address the issue, which White House officials blame on the property’s spotty cell service and “overtaxed” Wi-Fi infrastructure. Huh.

Evan Feinman, a top Commerce Department official sent a blistering email to his former colleagues on his way out the door warning that the Trump administration is poised to unduly enrich Elon Musk’s satellite internet company with money for rural broadband. The technology offered by Starlink, Musk’s company, is inferior, Feinman warned.

The next phase of Elon Musk’s plan to entangle his companies with the workings of the federal government is well underway. That entails not only President Donald Trump’s photo op with a Tesla in front of the White House but also, surprisingly, the future of your internet connection.

Meta has spent more than a year advocating for new laws requiring app stores to give parents control over kids’ app downloads, and just saw an early victory in the states.

Across U.S. politics, it’s become fashionable to blame nearly all the internet’s ills on one law I co-wrote: Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. Everyone from President Donald Trump to some of my Democratic colleagues argue that Section 230 has let major tech platforms moderate too much or too little. Trump’s Federal Communications Commission chairman, Brendan Carr, has already written about his plans to reinterpret the law himself. Many of these claims give Section 230 too much credit.