Arlington v. FCC did not hold that an...
Arlington v. FCC did not hold that an agency is always entitled to deference in its interpretation of the statutes it relies on, Verizon told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit in a filing Monday. Verizon was…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
responding to an FCC argument that Arlington bolstered its arguments in the court challenge to the net neutrality rules (CD May 24 p1). The Arlington decision, Verizon said, simply held that under the established Chevron framework, deference only applies when it resolves “'a statutory ambiguity’ that constitutes an implicit delegation to gap-fill.” And according to D.C. Circuit precedent, whether ambiguity exists is not a question that agencies get deference on, Verizon said. Congress declined to grant specific authority over the Internet, instead creating a distinct regulatory scheme for information services and expressly directing that the Internet remain “unfettered” by regulation, Verizon said, quoting Section 230 of the Telecom Act. “There is no gap to fill."