Regulatory classification

The 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals will not reconsider its decision in January to uphold California's net neutrality law. California's 2018 law barred internet service providers from blocking or throttling traffic, or offering paid fast lanes, but it only took effect in 2021.

In the long-running net neutrality debate, a key assumption has been that broadband and broadband Internet access service are “jurisdictionally interstate.” But are they really? And what does that mean? In practice, the interstate assumption has meant that important decisions about broadband law and policy are made almost exclusively by the federal government. The “who decides” question took on new immediacy in 2017, when the Federal Communications Commission gutted federal net neutrality rules, and then attempted to preempt the states from adopting their own.

Global standards ensure that things like smartphones and laptops — and even the internet itself — work across borders. "Standard bodies are essential to ensure interoperability which is critical to achieving 'economies of scale' and technology reach the masses," wireless consultant Chetan Sharma told Axios.  "Geopolitical tensions have a real prospect of splintering the Internet and the wireless industry and the emergence of completely decoupled supply chains and ecosystems around the world," Sharma said.

US officials are stepping up a campaign to defeat a Russian candidate for a United Nations agency that could determine how much control governments have over the internet. Russia's designs on the little-known agency raise the stakes for what the Russian government's vision of the internet could mean for the rest of the world, especially following its

Public Knowledge filed a Petition for Declaratory Ruling urging the Federal Communications Commission to declare Voice over Internet Protocol as a Title II “common carrier” telecommunications service. Communications Workers of America, Center for Rural Strategies, National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates, Next Century Cities, The Public Utility Law Project of New York, and The Utility Reform Network joined the filing.

This is the right decision. It will ensure that the people of California will continue to have unfettered internet access, blocks internet providers from discriminating against websites for financial or political gain, and reduces the chance that their customers will be ripped off.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld California’s net neutrality law, rejecting an attempt by telecommunications industry groups to prevent the state from enforcing it. The court upheld a previous ruling, which means the status quo stays and the state can continue to enforce the law. This means California can continue its ban on internet providers slowing down or blocking access to websites and applications that don’t pay for premium service. California's net neutrality law was signed by former Gov Jerry Brown (D-CA) in 2018.

Federal Communications Commission Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel responded to House Republicans' letter regarding state and federal net neutrality laws. The GOP letter—dated April 16, 2021 and led by Reps Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA) and Bob Latta (R-OH) as well as 24 others—addressed the Justice Department's withdrawal of its 2018 lawsuit against California for passing its own net neutrality regulations and Rosenworcel's support of the decision.

The Senate Commerce Committee held a hearing to consider the nominations of Jessica Rosenworcel, to continue as a commissioner of the Federal Communications Commission (Rosenworcel also serves as chair of the FCC), and Alvaro Bedoya, to be a commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission. 

The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act signed into law by President Joe Biden on November 15, 2021, was hailed by the White House and advocates as a historic investment to improve internet access in America. As a researcher who studies internet policy and digital inequality, I believe the infrastructure plan should be celebrated as a historic moment for broadband, but not so much because of the money it brings to the table. Rather, it is because of the way the law treats internet access in America.