Jon Brodkin
President Trump’s FCC chairman Ajit Pai is currently on track to get rid of net neutrality, which would allow internet service providers (ISPs) to have free reign over how they treat data on the internet. Broadband industry lobby groups have appealed to the SCOTUS in order for net neutrality rules to be overturned, as they have failed in past attempts to overturn the Title II net neutrality order. The lobby groups have insisted that the FCC exceeded its statutory authority by reclassifying ISPs as common carrier services, which are subject to more strict regulations. These lobby groups along with the ISPs CTIA and AT&T have pushed for the SCOTUS to get involved in the issue of net neutrality to declare that mobile internet access is immune from the Title II order of common carrier service regulations, but with FCC chairman Ajit Pai planning to revoke the net neutrality rules sooner rather than later, SCOTUS intervention seems more unlikely. If larger ISPs including AT&T and Verizon end up becoming immune from common carrier service regulations or are classified as information services that are not subject to net neutrality rules, than they would have significant power to weaken the competition with smaller ISPs by controlling their users’ access to these ISPs.
In addition to support from broadband lobby groups, ISPs could also get support from Republican congressmen, who have favored proposed bills in the past that would limit the FCC’s authority over ISPs.
Questions:
1. Do you see net neutrality as a partisan issue even though the revocation of the net neutrality rules would affect most consumers?
2. Is it possible that certain politicians may have business ties to ISPs? How might this affect their position on net neutrality and in turn, affect their constituents' support for them?
3. Do you think that the SCOTUS will get involved in any net neutrality cases in the near future? Why or why not?
I see net neutrality as a partisan issue, as Democrats are typically more activists and want more government involvement, hence advocating for net neutrality. Republicans are usually against net neutrality, which aligns with their ideology of less government involvement.
ReplyDelete1. I don't think net neutrality is a partisan issue. I believe this fits more accurately under hyperplurasim. This is just one example of who corporations are using lobbying power to loosen regulations.
ReplyDelete2. Well this assumption could me made. Also the FCC might have a decent amount of workers who were former employees of companies such as AT&T because of the "revolving door".
Net neutrality is definitely a partisan issue. Since Republicans tend to favor large enterprise and deregulation, this party will be the leaders in the movement to repeal net neutrality. Moreover, with Trump's appointment of Ajit Pai, the Republicans will be in control of the FCC. I believe that the SCOTUS will likely become involved with the issue due to the unpopularity on the repeal among democrat and startup groups. It is likely that net neutrality will be kept with court cases setting the precedent.
ReplyDeleteI think SCOTUS may get involved in any net neutrality cases because it is a very controversial topic and it would greatly change millions of lives. The verdict on net neutrality could anger many of Americans, therefore SCOTUS would get involved.
ReplyDelete1) I feel as though net neutrality is not a partisan issue. A reason that some people perceive it is a partisan issue is because Obama supported it, but fundamentally it is not a party driven viewpoint. Both Democrats and Republicans alike oppose the issue and it would affect both parties'voters, especially business owners. It would greatly fundamental rights, like free speech. Because the effects impact all and both parties have oppose the issue, it is not a mainly partisan problem.
ReplyDeleteI think that SCOTUS will be involved in some Net Neutrality cases very soon. Many people were not happy with the FCC's ruling and will someone will probably sue very soon. Net Neutrality impacts everyone so politicians shouldn't really be divided by partisanship. Instead they should be divided by their interests but as with everything controversial today, it will eventually become a partisan issue.
ReplyDeleteI think that SCOTUS will get involved very soon with cases that have to do with net neutrality because it is the most controversial topic of our current time. This will anger many Americans and many will try to find loopholes and argue that these big corporations are being greedy and have quite possibly caused this act to be passed in the first place.
ReplyDeleteI think that the Supreme Court will most definitely get involved with net neutrality cases, as it seems that nobody (aside from internet providers) is for it. This made many people unhappy and it will need to be dealt with in the future.
ReplyDeleteBeing told by many of my peers to text a number to vote for net neutrality, it already proves to me that people have a solid opinion on the topic. Being such a nationwide, controversial issue, SCOTUS will most likely get involved to decide on a precedent.
ReplyDeleteThe SCOTUS is likely to get involved in Net Neutrality related cases due to the fact that the concept is broad and there is a large community of people who are highly unhappy with the decision to eliminate it.
ReplyDeleteThough it would affect people of every party, net neutrality seems to be a partisan issue due to how it has divided the country. Many conservatives want to make revenue from the internet, while liberals tend to support more freedom within the internet and the access we have to it.
ReplyDeleteI do not think net neutrality is a partisan issue. The internet has a broad audience that spans across party lines. Thus, I think the Supreme Court should step in to rule on this case, as repealing net neutrality will upset people across the country.
ReplyDelete