Big Telecom Asks The Corrupt Supreme Court To Declare All State And Federal Broadband Consumer Protection Illegal. They Might Get Their Wish.

from the our-solution-is-to-simply-break-everything dept

As we recently noted, telecom giants like AT&T and Comcast are having some very good luck using a corrupt, MAGA-heavy court to not only kill popular net neutrality rules — but to effectively lobotomize the FCC’s ability to protect broadband consumers at all.

Leveraging the recent Supreme Court Lopper rulings, telecom lawyers are trying to argue that pretty much any effort to protect consumers from telecom monopolies is outside of the scope of the 1996 Telecom Act, whether or not precedent (whatever that’s worth now) or logic agrees. It’s the same story you’ll soon see played out across every industry that touches your lives post Chevron.

But in their so-far successful effort to kill the federal regulatory state, Comcast, AT&T, and friends have created a new quandary. Courts have repeatedly ruled that if the federal government abdicates its authority to protect broadband consumers from monopoly harm, states are fully within their legal right to step in and fill the void.

For every state whose legislature telecoms have completely captured (Arkansas, Missouri, Tennessee), there’s several that have, often imperfectly, tried to protect broadband consumers, either in the form of state level net neutrality laws (California, Oregon, Washington, Maine), crackdowns on lies about speeds or prices (Arizona, Indiana, Michigan), or requiring affordable low income broadband (New York).

In 2021 at the peak of COVID problems, New York passed a law mandating that heavily taxpayer subsidized telecoms provide a relatively slow (25 Mbps), $15 broadband tier only for low-income families that qualified. ISPs have sued (unsuccessfully so far) to kill the law, which was upheld last April by the US Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, reversing a 2021 District Court ruling. 

New York’s efforts to provide broadband to poor people was predicated on the Trump administration’s unpopular decision to repeal net neutrality and strip away the FCC’s Title II authority over telecoms. If big telecom blocks the restoration of this authority (and it’s looking likely so far based on hints from the sixth circuit), states are bolstered, as noted above, to step in and fill the void.

Telecoms like AT&T are frightened of states doing their jobs to protect consumers and market competition from their bad behavior. So a group of telecom trade groups this week petitioned the Supreme Court with a very specific ask. They want the court to first destroy FCC broadband consumer protection oversight and net neutrality, then kill New York’s effort, in that precise order, in two different cases.

Verizon, AT&T, and Comcast argue that if they are successful at killing FCC oversight of broadband consumer issues, states will follow NY’s lead and (gasp) try to offer poor people inexpensive broadband. Something they falsely claim will stifle their ability to expand broadband access:

“Other States are likely to copy New York once the Attorney General begins enforcing the ABA [Affordable Broadband Act] and New York consumers can buy broadband at below-market rates. As petitioners’ members have shown, New York’s price cap will require them to sell broadband at a loss and deter them from investing in expanding their broadband networks. As rate regulation proliferates, those harms will as well, stifling critical investment in bringing broadband to unserved and underserved areas.”

Big Telecom lawyers trot this claim out any time the government attempts to hold them accountable for anything (they falsely claimed the same about net neutrality and numerous merger approvals). But as local monopolies that see little real oversight or competition, they’re already disincentivized to actually care about shoring up broadband access, especially to poor, rural, minority markets.

In short, leveraging MAGA court corruption, telecoms want to make federal and state broadband consumer protection effectively illegal. The bullshit claim they feed a lazy press is that they’re rebalancing constitutional power and protecting the public from “renegade regulators.” If people want specific protection, they’ll insist, Congress should step in and pass a new, very clear, well-crafted law.

But telecoms spend an estimated $320,000 on lobbying Congress every day to ensure Congress never reforms much of anything. In reality, what these companies want is to protect their lucrative and harmful regional monopolies from federal/state government oversight and market competition. They want it all, they want no limits, and they don’t much care about the broader impact on real people.

And there’s a very real chance they’re going to get it.

Telecom consumer protection groups (which have been all but invisible in terms of modern strategic vision or social media public messaging as this shitshow unfolds) will almost certainly insist that something will protect the public from the worst possible outcome here. But post-Roe, rosy cheeked optimism as to what our corrupted courts will or won’t do just doesn’t carry the same weight.

You’d like to think that somewhere in the bowels of the sixth circuit exist adults who realize the madness and chaos caused by dismantling the federal government with no real additional backup plan. But I don’t think after the last few years that’s any sort of easy assumption.

Again, post-Chevron, some variation of this is going to be playing out in every industry that touches your lives. Logic or precedent be damned, corporate lawyers are going to argue that every consumer protection, public safety, environmental, or campaign finance regulator in the country can’t enforce or create new protections without the approval of FedSec judges or a corrupt Congress.

You’re getting an early sneak peak with telecom and net neutrality, but some variation of this will soon be playing out everywhere thanks to an easily-bribeable Supreme Court stocked with people who think utterly demolishing the girders of governance forges an amazing new utopia. For them.

For the rest of us, the result is going to be absolute legal chaos and an almost incalculable level of every day real-world harms, as any existing and future regulatory enforcement U.S. corporations don’t like grinds to a halt. Already feckless U.S. regulators will also be less incentivized than ever to push for reforms for fear of costly legal challenge.

Journalists, public policymakers, and activists have done an utterly abysmal job at making the full scope and impact of all of this clear to the public. But without immediate and massive Supreme Court and congressional campaign finance reforms (which, by any indication, aren’t coming anytime soon) the impact is going to be anything but subtle, and in many cases, deadly.

Filed Under: , , , , , , ,
Companies: at&t, comcast, verizon

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Big Telecom Asks The Corrupt Supreme Court To Declare All State And Federal Broadband Consumer Protection Illegal. They Might Get Their Wish.”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
30 Comments
Kinetic Gothic says:

This article is missing one big thing, an explanation on the phone company’s theory of how is this one-two punch supposed to work legally…

You do say they can’t nerf the FCC authority, without opening themselves to state regulation.

Why do they think otherwise, and could they be right? And if they’re wrong, why are they wrong?

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

You do say they can’t nerf the FCC authority, without opening themselves to state regulation. If they’re wrong, why are they wrong?

Because of the 10th Amendment. Granted, the current USSC is on a tear to tear up the Constitution (ala George ‘Dubya’ Bush stating “The Constitution is just a goddamn piece of paper!”), but they’re gonna have a difficult time getting this past the general population, should they even try it. Democrats have been planning an expansion of the Court, and if they take both chambers of Congress and the Whitehouse, it just may come to pass that such expansion may have a serious chance of coming to fruition.

Myself, I’d rather see Thomas and Alito impeached, successfully, and replaced by poeple who’ve been vetted to the hilt, looking for anything that may indicate future susceptability to bribery, etc. I could name a few other Justices, but that’d be a good start.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Can we stop calling it lobbying.

Politicians are bought like cattle. its open bribery with no legal consequences.

We’ve got Ted cruz, using “campaign contributions” to fund holidays for his cronies to Cancun.

Various others use the money for underage rentboys. Its public knowledge but they will NEVER face trial for child rape etc.

Comcast, AT&T etc Literally write laws word by word, then pay large sums of money to their servants (because they DO NOT serve the public anymore) to pass them without changes.

Even Facebook has laws written, with the game being to pretend investigators are “out to get social media” to make them seem enemies from a distance.

We’re not HEADED for a corporate run society, we’re deep inside it already. Large companies literally and physically OWN the legislature, the politicians, the police forces, government buildings and the people now.

American citizens are corporate slaves. and not in a metaphorical way. In an “do what we say or we will destroy/imprison you and your family” way.

Anonymous Coward says:

To Establish HISTORY--

To establish History, an “understanding as to WHY things exist presently,” the title of “The Corrupt Supreme Court” ought be maintained here-forward. Which, for those who would ask “why?,” can then be shown the entire path which lead to the descriptive Name.
or,
continue with ‘No Child Left Behind’ & ‘Book BANS!’ policies of “you do not need to know THAT, THESE, not even THOSE!” and remain blissfully(?) ignorant.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
ThatOtherOtherGuy says:

Have it BOTH ways

Kill the FCC under the banner of “states rights” which the conservative courts loves to do and then somehow bend over backwards to say that it is NOT solely a states rights issue but only when they say it isn’t.

I assume the conservative justices are all on private yachts of ISP owners mulling this exact issue as we speak.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
That One Guy (profile) says:

Re: 'You have the right to do and/or say what I want you to.'

As always any time a conservative talks about how much they support stuff like free speech, the free market or in this case state’s rights it should always be read as being followed by ‘… so long as it’s in my favor.’

Anonymous Coward says:

I looked back into my internet options last night.

Has AT&T, T-Mobile, or Version, expanded to cover my area with 5G and offer home internet? Nope.

Has the one physical service expanded out anything but shitty dsl? Nope.

Has any other competitor come in? Nope.

Given what I pay to have Starlink, and a dsl backup because I work from home I would pay out the ass for some fucking fiber if a company bothered to do anything.

American ISP’s have spent decades doing fuck all and it’s only getting worse.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

Yes, you are absolutely correct in that rapes and shootings only occur in the us (america).
(eyeroll)

btw, if one were to inspect a map or globe of the earth, one might realize that the word ‘America’ refers to two entire continents, one called North America and the other called South America. I know the word america is used many times as a reference to the country residing upon the North American continent known as The United States, but this is actually incorrect and can be an insult to those who do not reside within the country of The United States.
/fwiw

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

This is going to backfire in the long run

The last time the Supreme Court was this catering to private money in resulted in the backlash that got the XVIth Amendment trough back in 1913.

In the short run they will do a lot of public damage, but in the long run all this bulshit lethal temper tantrum over being regulated will serve to do is get them more tightly regulated than before they started dismantling state mechanisms.

That One Guy (profile) says:

'Mom, Dad, the states are trying to say the law applies to me again!'

Telecom and their tools in the party of State’s Rights: The federal government has no business telling ISP’s what they can and cannot do!

Individual states step in after the federal government abdicates responsibility and authority

Telecom and their tools in the party of State’s Rights: Foul! Shenanigans! How dare states try to impose any sorts of regulations on the businesses operating within them, this will be an absolute nightmare if ISP’s have to deal with dozens of different regulations so clearly the federal government needs to step in and create a nationwide set of regulations(that we’ll write)!

buttwipinglord (profile) says:

Re:

I don’t see how the 6th circuit could have granted that injunction given how it turned out when the FCC enacted NN the first time and then when Pai and Carr went after the states the courts correctly stated that if they had the power to enact it, they had the power to take it away too. And if they abdicated rule making responsibility for that particular thing from the federal level they could NOT dictate what states can and can do then.

What the fuck is even happening here?
Care should be locked up or kicked out of his job for his part in P2025 alone. Clearly he is unable to do his damned job.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get all our posts in your inbox with the Techdirt Daily Newsletter!

We don’t spam. Read our privacy policy for more info.

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...