Revival of Net Neutrality: A Current Update

➡Federal Communications Commission (FCC) cast a vote on 4/25/2024 in favor of reinstating net neutrality, a policy mandating broadband internet providers to treat all internet traffic with impartiality. The vote split along party lines, with the FCC's Democratic majority supporting the measure and the Republican minority dissenting. This decision largely restores the policy initially instituted during Obama's administration in 2015, which was subsequently repealed under Trump's administration in 2017.

➡Net neutrality rules are crafted to guarantee equal access to the global internet for all websites and applications, irrespective of their size or their capacity to pay the proprietors of the internet's infrastructure, such as network cables and cell towers. These rules prevent broadband internet providers from manipulating speeds or establishing internet "fast lanes", where a company could pay a premium for accelerated upload and download speeds of its content.

➡The outcome of this vote implies that broadband services will now be classified as Title II telecommunications services. This category, derived from federal law, originally applied to phone networks to ensure non-discriminatory practices. This classification brings the internet closer to being recognized as a crucial service, akin to electricity or water supply.

↘ Internet behemoths like Google and Netflix have frequently supported net neutrality rules, contending that they foster a free and open internet. They caution that without net neutrality, the internet could become segregated, creating a hierarchical system where access to certain content or faster speeds is only available to those willing to pay more. This could potentially stifle innovation and competition, undermining the principle that the internet should be an equitable space for all.

➡On the other hand, internet service providers (ISPs) have typically resisted such regulation for a variety of reasons:

↘Financial Considerations: In the absence of net neutrality, ISPs could charge content providers additional fees for expedited delivery of their content, thereby creating so-called "fast lanes". This could potentially increase the ISPs' revenue streams.

↘Tailored Services: Without net neutrality, ISPs could have the ability to offer bespoke services to their customers. They could customize their service offerings to meet different customer needs, potentially including the provision of premium services at elevated prices.

↘Network Management: ISPs argue that they need to manage their networks to ensure a satisfactory user experience for everyone. Without the constraints of net neutrality, they could prioritize certain types of traffic to maintain smooth network operation.

➡Industry groups are anticipated to challenge these rules in court, marking a significant new evaluation of the federal government's authority. In previous legal disputes surrounding net neutrality, courts have typically sided with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), affirming that it has broad powers to regulate ISPs as it deems appropriate based on its authority from the Communications Act of 1934.

However, this long-standing judicial deference to expert agencies is increasingly being questioned as the Supreme Court, with a conservative tilt, expresses growing skepticism about the extent of federal executive authority.