Court case

The Federal Communications Commission has filed a document with the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that could help the Trump Administration's challenge of a DC district judge's decision to allow the merger of AT&T/Time Warner, which closed back in June.  That includes the current, Republican-led FCC emphasizing the previous Democratic-led FCC's conclusion that the Comcast/NBCU transaction would increase bargaining leverage and raise prices of programming to rival distributors—hence the conditions applied on that deal.

A federal court has blocked the Federal Communications Commission from making changes to its Lifeline broadband subsidy program that would have effectively eliminated benefits for many Native Americans living on tribal lands. A three-judge panel of the DC Circuit Court of Appeals issued a stay of the FCC’s order, saying that it would likely cause significant loss of telecommunications service to tribal areas.

Tribune Media said in court filings that its merger path over the past 12 months with Sinclair Broadcast Group was bloodied not by regulatory pressure but by its partner's hubris, and is seeking $1 billion in damages to help heal its wounds. Tribune said Sinclair repeatedly failed to disclose key information to tribune and regulators, a practice which helped torpedo the deal. According to the suit, the deal would have likely been approved months ago if Sinclair had only agreed to divest of stations in 10 overlap markets earmarked by the Department of Justice and presented clean station sale

Tribune Media will withdraw from its $3.9 billion merger with Sinclair Broadcast Group, saying it would sue Sinclair for “breach of contract” over its failed negotiations with regulators over the deal. “In light of the FCC’s unanimous decision, referring the issue of Sinclair’s conduct for a hearing before an administrative law judge, our merger cannot be completed within an acceptable time frame, if ever,” said Peter Kern, Tribune’s chief executive officer. “This uncertainty and delay would be detrimental to our company and our shareholders.

Not long after several of the country’s biggest tech firms — Apple, Facebook and Google — kicked the conspiracy theorist Alex Jones off their various online platforms, Jones’s allies complained that he had been deprived of his First Amendment rights to free speech. Several scholars of free speech had already concluded that many of the things he has said online were not in fact protected by the First Amendment. 

The Federal Communications Commission has already repealed net neutrality, but the Trump administration can't leave it there. It also wants the Supreme Court to remove a ruling that upheld the controversial Obama-era rules. Is this a big deal? It depends on who you ask. While the request is somewhat unusual, not many cases upholding government regulation are followed by a repeal of that regulation, some legal experts say remanding the decision is just a bit of legal housecleaning. But net neutrality supporters disagree.

As our economy becomes increasingly digitized, more transactions are moving online and outside of local tax jurisdictions, costing states billions in lost sales tax revenue. The recent Supreme Court decision in South Dakota v. Wayfair has opened the door for states to collect sales tax on online purchases made at out-of-state businesses. Applying state taxes on interstate commerce could not only recover lost revenues, but also make national e-commerce companies more invested in state government.

The Justice Department argued that US District Judge Richard Leon ignored “fundamental principles of economics and common sense” when he allowed AT&T to acquire Time Warner. The department’s appellate brief, filed with the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, argued Judge Leon’s ruling was “clearly erroneous in light of the evidence presented at trial.” The government brief argued Judge Leon’s contrary conclusion came about because he “discarded the economics of bargaining” and failed to apply “the foundational principle” that corporations will aim to maximize their

The Department of Justice and the Federal Communications Commission requested that the Supreme Court vacate a 2016 appeals court decision upholding net neutrality rules adopted by the FCC in 2015. If the court decides to grant the motion, the previous decision to support the rules would be removed, clearing the path for re-litigation in the future when it comes to classifying broadband. If the DOJ and FCC’s request is approved by the court, the previous rules, spearheaded by then-FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler, would be voided from the judicial record.

The DC Circuit Court of Appeals has set briefing deadlines in the challenge to the Federal Communications Commission’s net neutrality repeal. Mozilla, state attorneys general and other groups fighting the FCC’s rollback will file their arguments Aug. 20. The Internet Association, Computer & Communications Industry Association and other organizations bolstering their case will file Aug. 27. The FCC has to respond Oct. 11, and the telecom associations backing the agency, including CTIA and USTelecom, will file their briefs Oct. 18. Final briefs in the case are due Nov. 27.