No Waiting for This: Here Come the 'Net Neutrality' Lawsuits
"We are 5-0 against the Trump administration because they often fail to follow the law when taking executive action," the Washington state attorney general said in a statement that vowed swift legal action.
December 14, 2017 at 03:21 PM
5 minute read
Net neutrality rally at FCC on Thursday, Dec. 14. Credit: C. Ryan Barber
Democratic state attorneys general and advocacy groups Thursday said they were gearing up to fight the Federal Communications Commission over its move to scrap the Obama-era net neutrality rules that were adopted to ensure equal access to the web.
As protestors outside the FCC pronounced the death of an open internet, the FCC, led by Ajit Pai, a former Verizon lawyer, voted on party lines Thursday to repeal so-called net neutrality rules.
The 3-2 vote scraps an earlier framework, finalized in 2015, that regulated high-speed internet as a utility and prevented broadband companies from blocking website or charging for higher-quality service. It was the latest, and most devastating, setback from the FCC's push to require those broadband providers to treat internet traffic equally regardless of its source.
Last year, a federal appeals court in Washington upheld the FCC's efforts to promote internet openness and prevent internet broadband providers from favoring certain content and services, after twice previously sending the agency back to the drawing board.
Now, here come the lawsuits.
Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson, moments after the repeal vote succeeded, announced his intent to sue the FCC. Any petition to review the order would likely go first into the D.C. Circuit.
“We are 5-0 against the Trump administration because they often fail to follow the law when taking executive action,” Ferguson said in a statement. “There is a strong legal argument that with this action, the federal government violated the Administrative Procedure Act—again.”
Ferguson said he planned to file a petition for review in the coming days.
Leading up to Thursday's action, 18 state attorneys general had asked the FCC to delay the vote, citing their concerns over a flood of fraudulent public comments filed over the agency's proposal to reverse net neutrality rules.
New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has raised questions about the veracity of the FCC's comment process. His office said researchers and reporters this year discovered “enormous numbers of fake comments” were flooding in about the possible repeal of net neutrality rules.
“The FCC's vote to rip apart net neutrality is a blow to New York consumers, and to everyone who cares about a free and open internet,” Schneiderman said in a statement Thursday. “The FCC just gave Big Telecom an early Christmas present, by giving internet service providers yet another way to put corporate profits over consumers.”
Commissioner Michael O'Rielly, a Republican member of the FCC, on Thursday downplayed the effect of the fake comments on the agency's process.
“Some would like ot have us believe that the comment process has been irreparably tainted by the large number of fake comments. That view reflects a lack of understanding of the Administrative Procedure Act,” he said. “The agency is required to consider and respond to all significant comments in the record–millions of comments that simply say something along the lines of, 'Keep net neutrality,' or other colorful language we can't say in public, including a couple that referred to me as a potato.”
Outside the FCC's headquarters on Thursday, protesters laid out flowers and candles. One sign, nestled among bouquets of flowers, read, “#RIPinternet.”
Net neutrality rally at FCC. Credit: C. Ryan Barber
Tensions ran high in the months leading up to the vote. Last month, Pai disclosed that he had been threatened personally, with some public comments taking aim at his Indian ethnicity and signs placed near his home saying, “They will come to know the truth. Dad murdered democracy in cold blood.” On Thursday, the FCC's meeting was briefly interrupted when security personnel cleared out the room to investigate a bomb threat.
Pai, an Obama-appointee whom the Trump administration elevated to the chairmanship early this year, on Thursday rejected the notion that the vote would spell the end of a free and open internet.
“So let's be absolutely clear,” he said. “Following today's vote, Americans will still be able to access the websites they want to visit. They will still be able to enjoy the services they want to enjoy. There will still be cops on the beat guarding a free and open Internet. This is the way things were prior to 2015, and this is the way they will be once again.”
Pai also took on some of his Silicon Valley adversaries, namely Twitter, a company he has criticized for blocking certain content but also allowing certain posts to be promoted. As Recode reported last month, Pai noted that Twitter had once prevented a Republican congresswoman from promoting a tweet about abortion, only to later change its mind after drawing a public backlash.
On Thursday, Pai said, “Some giant Silicon Valley platforms favor imposing heavy-handed regulations on other parts of the Internet ecosystem. But all too often, they don't practice what they preach. Edge providers regularly block content that they don't like. They regularly decide what news, search results, and products you see—and perhaps more importantly, what you don't. And many thrive on the business model of charging to place content in front of eyeballs. What else is 'Accelerated Mobile Pages' or promoted tweets but prioritization?”
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllWhen Police Destroy Property, Is It a 'Taking'? Maybe So, Say Sotomayor, Gorsuch
Justices Seek Solicitor General's Views on Music Industry's Copyright Case Against ISP
SEC Obtained Record $8.2 Billion in Financial Remedies for Fiscal Year 2024, Commission Says
SEC Targets Rising Crypto Financier in $115 Million Securities Fraud
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Will Trump Be a Boost to Quinn Emanuel's Fortunes in China?
- 2Mayer Brown’s Hong Kong Split to Take Effect
- 3Simpson Thacher Launches in Luxembourg With Hires From A&O Shearman, Clifford Chance
- 4How Cybercriminals Exploit Law Firms’ Holiday Vulnerabilities
- 5Big Firms May See 'Uncomfortable Flashbacks' as Cost Pressure Grows
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250