A federal appeals court this week ruled that the Federal Communications Commission and Biden administration overstepped their authority by reviving net neutrality rules last year.
The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals three-judge panel said the FCC was wrong to label broadband as a telecommunications service instead of an information service. The distinction was the basis for giving FCC power to wield net neutrality rules.
Under the rules, which were struck down during the first Trump administration, broadband internet providers could not block or throttle internet access or speed up access to certain websites that pay higher fees. Net neutrality proponents say the rules ensure open and fair access to the internet, while detractors say the rules stifle innovation and weaken competition.
Net neutrality was first approved in 2015 under the Obama administration and struck down the first Trump administration in 2017. In a down-the-line partisan vote, the FCC restored the rules last April.
Democratic FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel urged Congress to take action against Thursday’s court decision.
“Consumers across the country have told us again and again that they want an internet that is fast, open, and fair,” Rosenworcel said in a statement. “With this decision it is clear that Congress now needs to heed their call, take up the charge for net neutrality, and put open internet principles in federal law.”
In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Tim Wu, a Columbia law professor and consultant for the Biden Administration’s competition and antitrust policy, disagreed with the court’s ruling.
“When Congress passed the Telecommunications Act in 1934, it clearly wanted the American people to enjoy non-discriminatory, low-cost communications services. Finding otherwise is blatant judicial activism that puts corporate interests over American democracy,” he wrote.
Republican FCC commissioner Brendan Carr applauded the court’s decision, deriding the FCC’s “nearly limitless” power over the internet as a utility under Title II of the Communication Act.
“Rather than focusing on a broadband agenda that would bridge the digital divide, the Biden Administration chose to waste time and resources imposing these unnecessary command and control regulations,” Carr said in a statement. “I am pleased that the appellate court invalidated President Biden’s internet power grab by striking down these unlawful Title II regulations. But the work to unwind the Biden Administration’s regulatory overreach will continue.”
In the published opinion, the judges wrote that the action to restore net neutrality “resurrected the FCC’s heavy-handed regulatory regime.”
Tim Wood, net neutrality advocate and general counsel of Free Press, scoffed at the court’s ruling.
“It’s rich to think of Donald Trump and Elon Musk’s hand-picked FCC chairman characterizing light-touch broadband rules as heavy-handed regulation, while scheming to force carriage of viewpoints favorable to Trump on the nation’s broadcast airwaves and social media sites,” Wood said in a statement. “With this ruling, the 6th Circuit has for now denied the public the internet access service that it deserves…”