Last Tuesday, the D.C. Circuit issued its long-awaited decision in U.S. Telecom Association v. FCC, better known as the “net neutrality case.” Myriad petitioners challenge the FCC’s “Open Internet Order,” the agency’s 2015 decision to unilaterally reclassify broadband Internet access services as a “telecommunications service” rather than an “information service,” and thus to regulate broadband Internet as a “common carrier” — that is, much like a 19th century railroad.
The court’s split decision (with Judges Tatel and Srinivasan in the majority, and Judge Williams dissenting) already has spurred no shortage of commentary, including Seth Cooper at this blog, and Aaron Nielson at “Notice and Comment,” the official blog of the Yale Journal on Regulation and the ABA’s Administrative Law Section.
In the same vein, on Friday I had the pleasure of discussing the D.C. Circuit panel's decision with Brett Shumate, on a Federalist Society teleforum. (Brett and I both represented challengers in this case, so it’s safe to say that the discussion was more pleasing than the panel's decision.) The audio is now available on the Federalist Society’s website. Thanks for all the good questions.
* * * * *
Adam J. White is a research fellow with the Hoover Institution. Before joining Hoover, he represented intervenors TechFreedom et al. in this case, as counsel at Boyden Gray & Associates. He continues to be “of counsel” to Boyden Gray & Associates in this litigation.