SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Submitted via IRC for Runaway1956__
FCC sued by dozens of cities after voting to kill local fees and rules
The Federal Communications Commission faces a legal battle against dozens of cities from across the United States, which sued the FCC to stop an order that preempts local fees and regulation of cable-broadband networks.
The cities filed lawsuits in response to the FCC's August 1 vote that limits the fees municipalities can charge cable companies and prohibits cities and towns from regulating broadband services offered over cable networks.
"At least 46 cities are asking federal appeals courts to undo an FCC order they argue will force them to raise taxes or cut spending on local media services, including channels that schools, governments, and the general public can use for programming," Bloomberg Law wrote Tuesday.
Various lawsuits were filed against the FCC between August and the end of October, and Bloomberg's report said that most of the suits are being consolidated into a single case in the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit. An FCC motion to transfer the case to the 6th Circuit, which has decided previous cases on the same topic, is pending.
The 9th Circuit case was initially filed by Eugene, Oregon, which said the FCC order was arbitrary and capricious and that it violated the Administrative Procedure Act, the Constitution, and the Communications Act. The cities' arguments and the FCC's defense will be fleshed out more in future briefs.
Big cities such as Los Angeles, Chicago, Philadelphia, San Antonio, San Francisco, Denver, and Boston are among those suing the FCC. Also suing are other municipalities from Maine, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Virginia, Maryland, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas, Arizona, California, Oregon, and Washington, according to a Bloomberg graphic. The state of Hawaii is also suing the FCC, and New York City is supporting the lawsuit against the FCC as an intervening party.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 17 2019, @06:47PM
That is kindof an interesting view.
Without financial incentive, the state governments will have no incentive (other than bribery, in all of its various lawful and unlawful forms) to continue with exclusive right-of way-contracts. In fact, the Fed would be invalidated hundreds of contracts between the states and the telcos in one move. Of course the carriers would sue, but really the states exclusive right-of-way agreements are a violation of the 1st amendment anyway. But state judges are cheaper to buy than federal ones I would imagine.
The better solution is to say that the will documented interference with interpersonal communication by the carriers, makes the states endorsement of exclusive right-of-way agreements direct interference with the 1st amendment. Which it is, and it should really be trivial to prove at this day and age.
On one hand, it may free up some local telecom markets. On the other hand, they are essentially federalizing all of the carriers into one institution. Not that it really matters, since they are all agents of the state at this point anyway.