D.C. Memo: What Happens Now? Supreme Court Protects N.Y. ABA

◾ Carr Climbs Massive TV Tower in Alabama ◾ Gomez on FCC-Driven Sec. 230 Reform: DOA ◾ ITIF's Kane to Team Trump: Stop Wasteful Broadband Spending ◾ UBS Analyst: Cable ISPs lost 340,000 Subs in Q4

SCOTUS: The way the law stands now, states are free to disregard the FCC’s decision to shield broadband ISPs from heavy-handed regulation, including price caps on retail plans. That legal status quo was cemented yesterday when the U.S. Supreme Court refused – for the second time since December – to hear ISPs’ challenge to New York’s Affordable Broadband Act. Apart from the impact on ISPs, critics of the Republican-packed Supreme Court as a captured creature of Big Business might need to find a new narrative. Enacted in 2021, the ABA requires ISPs to offer low-income consumers a basic service plan of 25 Mbps for $15 per month or 200 Mbps for $20 per month. Exemptions are available for ISPs with 20,000 subs or fewer. Starlink has already applied. The law has encountered problems early on. On the day the law went into effect (Jan. 15), AT&T said it was pulling its Fixed Wireless Access service in protest over the ABA. At least one analyst thinks Starlink might cap its New York sub based at 20,000 to avoid a collision with the ABA. Under a holding by the Second Circuit that the Supreme Court refused to disturb yesterday, the FCC’s classification of ISPs as information service providers did not preempt states from passing laws like the ABA. Similar laws are pending in Massachusetts and California, confirming ISPs’ slippery-slope argument they pitched to the Supreme Court in seeking review of the Second Circuit. (Continued after paywall.)