Court case

The Supreme Court allowed Biden administration officials to continue to contact social media platforms to combat what the officials say is misinformation, pausing a sweeping ruling from a federal appeals court that had severely limited such interactions. The justices also agreed to hear the administration’s appeal in the case, setting the stage for a major test of the role of the First Amendment in the internet era — one that will require the court to consider when government efforts to limit the spread of misinformation amount to censorship of constitutionally protected speech.

The Federal Communications Commission's Wireline Competition Bureau seeks comment on petitions for reconsideration of the Restoring Internet Freedom (RIF) Remand Order filed by Common Cause, INCOMPAS, Public Knowledge, and the County of Santa Clara. The petitioners request that the FCC reconsider its decision in the RIF Remand Order, reverse or vacate that Order, and initiate a rulemaking proceeding to address the concerns raised by the DC Court of Appeals pertaining to the 2018 RIF Order. In addition to the issues raised in the petitions, the FCC invites comment on how the issues under con

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case in early 2024 that could impact how much regulatory discretion the FCC has over the communications industry. The court agreed to hear the case of Relentless Inc., et al. v. Dept. of Commerce, et al. The case is about a federal rule requiring fishing companies to pay for government monitoring of their herring catches.

Mobile communications company Ligado Networks sued the U.S. Departments of Defense and Commerce for unlawful taking of Ligado’s constitutionally protected, exclusively licensed spectrum without compensation. Backed by a multiyear misinformation and disparagement campaign against Ligado to conceal these activities, the U.S.

The Federal Communications Commission currently regulates broadband internet access service (BIAS, if you will) as an "information service" under Title I of the Communications Act. As the FCC contemplates reclassifying BIAS as a telecommunications service under Title II's common-carrier framework, the question is whether the FCC has authority to do so. Federal appeals courts have upheld previous FCC decisions on whether to apply common carrier rules to broadband.

The debate around “net neutrality” is back, only this time there is even less chance that the matter will be settled for good. Consumers’ online rights still need protection, and restoring them for an open internet is worthwhile. Those pointing to internet service providers’ (ISP) “good behavior” are being disingenuous at best. The 2018 decision to reverse the Federal Communications Commission's earlier net neutrality rule was being challenged in court until 2020, by which point several states had set up or had in motion their own net neutrality regulations in the absence of a federal one.

Net neutrality regulations have been dead for years, and they should stay that way. Unfortunately, the Federal Communications Commission has moved to reopen and re-litigate the issue. FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel has initiated a new rule-making that would enact what are largely the same net neutrality rules tried back in 2016. The law has changed and markets have changed, and yet the arguments for and against net neutrality have largely remained the same.

The Federal Trade Commission and 17 states sued Amazon, alleging the online retailer illegally wields monopoly power that keeps prices artificially high, locks sellers into its platform, and harms its rivals. The FTC and states alleged that Amazon violated antitrust laws by using anti-discounting measures that punished merchants for offering lower prices elsewhere.

There have been several lawsuits over the last few years that challenge the legitimacy of the Federal Communications Commission's Universal Service Fund (USF). A suit from a non-profit group called Consumers’ Research argues that USF fees are taxes and that the original creation of the USF was unconstitutional since the Telecommunications Act of 1996 gave the FCC the power to levy taxes.

Federal Communications Commissioner Brendan Carr, a longtime opponent of net neutrality rules, blasted the idea of bringing back regulations now that Democrats have a majority at the agency again. He said that recent Supreme Court law makes clear that a net neutrality revival would not survive legal challenges, meaning that any effort to craft rules would sap time from a FCC that should be focused elsewhere.