The Sixth Circuit’s temporary stay comes only weeks after the Supreme Court overturned Chevron deference, weakening the FCC.
Share this story
A federal appeals court has agreed to halt the reinstatement of net neutrality rules until August 5th, while the court considers whether more permanent action is justified.
It’s the latest setback in a long back and forth on net neutrality — the principle that internet service providers (ISPs) should not be able to block or throttle internet traffic in a discriminatory manner. The Federal Communications Commission has sought to achieve this by reclassifying ISPs under Title II of the Communications Act, which gives the agency greater regulatory oversight. The Democratic-led agency enacted net neutrality rules under the Obama administration, only for those rules to be repealed under former President Donald Trump’s FCC. The current FCC, which has three Democratic and two Republican commissioners, voted in April to bring back net neutrality. The 3–2 vote was divided along party lines.
Broadband providers have since challenged the FCC’s action, which is potentially more vulnerable after the Supreme Court’s recent decision to strike down Chevron deference — a legal doctrine that instructed courts to defer to an agency’s expert decisions except in a very narrow range of circumstances. Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Matt Schettenhelm said in a report prior to the court’s ruling that he doesn’t expect the FCC to prevail in court, in large part due to the demise of Chevron.
A panel of judges for the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals said in an order that a temporary “administrative stay is warranted” while it considers the merits of the broadband providers’ request for a permanent stay. The administrative stay will be in place until August 5th. In the meantime, the court requested the parties provide additional briefs about the application of National Cable & Telecommunications Association v. Brand X Internet Services to this lawsuit. Brand X is a 2005 case in which the Supreme Court ruled that the FCC had lawfully interpreted the Communications Act to exclude cable broadband providers from the definition of “telecommunications services.” At the time, SCOTUS said the lower court should have followed Chevron and deferred to the agency’s interpretation.
