Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by mrpg on Monday October 01 2018, @08:40AM   Printer-friendly
from the game-on dept.

California gov. signs nation's strictest net neutrality rules into law:

California Governor Jerry Brown today signed net neutrality legislation into law, setting up a legal showdown pitting his state against Internet service providers and the Federal Communications Commission.

The California net neutrality bill, previously approved by the state Assembly and Senate despite protests from AT&T and cable lobbyists, imposes rules similar to those previously enforced by the FCC.

"While the Trump administration does everything in its power to undermine our democracy, we in California will continue to do what's right for our residents," California State Senator Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco), author of the net neutrality bill, said today.

California's legal authority to impose its own net neutrality rules will be tested in court. The FCC's recent repeal of federal rules said that states aren't allowed to impose net neutrality rules, and FCC Chairman Ajit Pai called California's net neutrality bill "illegal."


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Funny) by DeathMonkey on Monday October 01 2018, @04:31PM (3 children)

    by DeathMonkey (1380) on Monday October 01 2018, @04:31PM (#742347) Journal

    Gotta love those Republican defenders of States Rights!

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Funny=2, Touché=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Funny' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 01 2018, @04:58PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 01 2018, @04:58PM (#742356)

    Actually I think at least on this issue we are getting rather little of that hypocrisy. Just the one AC spewing nonsense.

  • (Score: 2) by Thexalon on Monday October 01 2018, @05:52PM

    by Thexalon (636) on Monday October 01 2018, @05:52PM (#742376)

    As with most political principles, whether somebody supports "states' rights" usually has everything to do with what they want to do and what the federal government wants to do.

    The most extreme example of this I can think of is that in the late 1850's, the southern states were against states' rights because the northern states were often lackadaisical about enforcing the Fugitive Slave Act. But by the 1870's, those very same states, and in many cases the very same people, were vigorously asserting states' rights as the reason why the federal government needed to leave them alone to implement Jim Crow laws, and also claiming that was the reason that they had fought against the federal government in the 1860's. Meanwhile, on the other side of the Mason-Dixon Line, the northern states were indeed asserting their states rights when it came to enforcing the Fugitive Slave Act and many other anti-abolitionist laws, but were a few years later a lot less interested in states rights after federal troops were patrolling downtown Atlanta.

    This is all an extension of a useful political rule: If you want to understand what's going on, ignore what politicians say, and instead watch what they do.

    --
    The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
  • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Monday October 01 2018, @10:14PM

    by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Monday October 01 2018, @10:14PM (#742511) Homepage
    Idjit Pai and cronies clearly like having states defend their rights.

    In a court: https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/30/doj-sues-california-net-neutrality-854298
    --
    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves