Policyband

Policyband

Share this post

Policyband
Policyband
D.C. Memo: Carr Says No Net Neutrality Enforcement Until Courts Finish Review
Copy link
Facebook
Email
Notes
More

D.C. Memo: Carr Says No Net Neutrality Enforcement Until Courts Finish Review

◾ Starlink To Rep. Carl's Rescue ◾ Rosenworcel Not Reviving Fairness Doctrine ◾ Cooley Notes ISP Privacy Uncertainty ◾ House Reauthorizes NTIA: First Time In 30 Years ◾ Senate Postpones ACP Vote Again

May 17, 2024
∙ Paid
5

Share this post

Policyband
Policyband
D.C. Memo: Carr Says No Net Neutrality Enforcement Until Courts Finish Review
Copy link
Facebook
Email
Notes
More
Share

Title II: At a hearing on Capitol Hill yesterday on the FCC’s $448 million budget request, Republican FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr said the agency was wasting money by regulating broadband ISPs as common carriers under Title II of the Communications Act. “The FCC should not spend any more resources enforcing those Title II rules at least until the courts have finished their review,” Carr said. Carr’s timetable could put off enforcement for several years. Carr testified alongside FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government. Subcommittee Chairman Rep. David Joyce (R-Oh.), speaking before Carr, criticized the FCC’s Net Neutrality rules adopted on April 25. “It’s my view that this action is unnecessarily reviving a politicized policy that has no statutory authority,” Joyce said.

From Left: Republican FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr and Democratic FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel testifying Thursday before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government.

“Such actions are not what an independent agency like this one should be focused on.” Asked by Joyce if the Net Neutrality rules clash with the Supreme Court’s Major Questions Doctrine, Rosenworcel insisted the courts would sustain the rules. “I am confident that it will continue to be upheld. It is also consistent with the Supreme Court decision known as Brand X from 2005. I think the work we did is wholly consistent with the law,” she said.

This post is for paid subscribers

Already a paid subscriber? Sign in
© 2025 Ted Hearn
Publisher Terms
Substack
Privacy ∙ Terms ∙ Collection notice
Start writingGet the app
Substack is the home for great culture

Share

Copy link
Facebook
Email
Notes
More