Court ruled broadband isn’t telecoms

The Obama-era FCC won on this point in the District of Columbia Circuit in 2016, a Supreme Court judgment in 2024 provided courts more power to obstruct guidelines when judges disagree with a firm’s analysis of federal statutes. Judges at the 6th Circuit consequently chose that broadband should be categorized as an “information service” under United States law.

“The 6th Circuit’s decision earlier this year was spectacularly wrong, and the protections it struck down are extremely important. But rather than attempting to overcome an agency that changed hands—and a Supreme Court majority that cares very little about the rule of law—we’ll keep fighting for Internet affordability and openness in Congress, state legislatures and other court proceedings nationwide,” Wood stated.

Free Press, groups revealing that they will not appeal are the Benton Institute for Broadband & & Society, New America’s Open Technology Institute, and Public Knowledge.

“Though the 6th Circuit erred egregiously in its decision to overturn the FCC’s 2024 Open Internet order, there are other ways we can advance our fight for consumer protections and ISP accountability than petitioning the Supreme Court to review this case—and, given the current legal landscape, we believe our efforts will be more effective if focused on those alternatives,” stated Raza Panjwani, senior policy counsel at the Open Technology Institute.

Net neutrality might still reach the Supreme Court in another case. Andrew Jay Schwartzman, senior therapist of the Benton Institute for Broadband & & Society, stated that “the 6th Circuit decision makes bad policy as well as bad law. Because it is at odds with the holdings of two other circuits, we expect to take the issue to the Supreme Court in a future case.”

California still imposes a net neutrality law. ISPs attempted to get that law overruled, however courts chose that states might control net neutrality when the FCC isn’t doing so.