Regulatory classification

In the leadup to the Federal Communications Commission's historic vote in Dec 2017 to repeal all network neutrality protections, 22 million comments were filed to the agency. The FCC did nothing to try to prevent comment stuffing and comment fraud, and even after the vote, made no attempt to help the public, journalists, policymakers actually understand what Americans actually told the FCC about the repeal of the 2015 Open Internet Order. This report aims to help make that clear. This report used the 800,000 comments identified as semantic standouts from form letter and fraud campaigns.

The Federal Communications Commission told the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that it acted properly when it repealed the US government’s net neutrality rules in 2017, marking its first legal salvo in a campaign to battle back 22 states and tech companies including Mozilla, Facebook, and Google that contend the agency’s move was illegal. The FCC said it was perfectly within its right to rethink how it regulated those internet service providers, citing a landmark Supreme Court decision outlining the agency’s powers from 2005.

Does California have authority to impose net neutrality rules? Both the US Department of Justice and the broadband industry claim that the inherently interstate nature of the internet means that only the federal government can regulate broadband services. A second, even thornier question is whether the Federal Communications Commission was within its rights when it effectively banned states from adopting net neutrality rules. At its heart is this conundrum: In repealing the Obama-era rules, the FCC said it didn’t have authority to impose net neutrality regulations.

On Sept 30, 2018, Gov. Jerry Brown (D-CA) signed SB 822, California’s net neutrality law -- the strictest in the nation and widely seen as a challenge to the federal government. The Department of Justice quickly sued the state to block enactment of the rules. Two days later, lobbyists for broadband service providers filed their own suit. Everybody seems to be suing everybody in the latest chapter of the net neutrality saga. But, some clarity could come from it. And, ya know, Congress could act and settle the matter.

When the Trump administration decided to dump net neutrality rules designed to treat all data equally, the states revolted. Thirty legislatures introduced bills to prohibit internet service providers from hindering access to certain sites and charging fees for faster speeds. Four states, including California, passed laws, and six governors issued executive orders declaring they would not do business with internet providers that violated net neutrality.  The Trump administration decided to fight back and challenge California’s law, the broadest in the nation.

Trying to protect an open internet state by state, rather than by federal law, is a daunting and unwieldy goal. Unfortunately, it’s also entirely necessary, given that the Trump administration and Congress are more than happy to let internet providers restrict what we — the American people — can see and access online. As much as the internet has been abused by bogus web and social media sites, an independent internet is an important part of maintaining an informed citizenry. Getting rid of net neutrality means you might pay more for such things as streaming movies from particular sites.

Four lobby groups representing the broadband industry sued California to stop the state's new network neutrality law. The lawsuit was filed in US District Court for the Eastern District of California by mobile industry lobby CTIA, cable industry lobby NCTA, telco lobby USTelecom, and the American Cable Association, which represents small and mid-size cable companies.

Recently, California passed its own network neutrality laws, to ban blocking and throttling of the internet, as a stand-in for the federal net neutrality rules abandoned by the Trump administration in June. California has obvious reasons to want to protect an open internet: It is the land of the internet’s origin, and a place where tech entrepreneurship has thrived. If the Republican Party actually believed in economic decentralization, it might well accept the premise of state rules where the federal government explicitly disclaims any authority to act.

The fight over net neutrality today can be reduced to a single sentence: Everyone is suing everyone else. Congress should step in. The Federal Communications Commission abdicated its responsibility on net neutrality when it repealed the old rules with no adequate replacement. Now, without setting forth its own rules, the federal government is seeking to block states from creating their own. That may be frustrating to Americans who want an Internet where providers do not dictate what information reaches them and how fast.

CA just passed the toughest state-level network neutrality law in the nation, and within hours, the Department of Justice sued the state to block the law from going into effect. It’s the start of a new chapter in the fight for net neutrality, as the federal government works hand in hand with the telecom industry to stop a wave of state-level net neutrality protections. But legal experts said that the effort to remove states from the consumer protection equation rests on shaky legal ground and may only buy the telecom sector time rather than rolling back the law completely.