Public Knowledge Files as Intervenor in Legal Challenges to FCC's Net Neutrality Rules
Public Knowledge struck back Wednesday at ISPs and associations challenging the FCC’s net neutrality order, filing a motion for leave to intervene in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to the various challenges filed so far. Meanwhile, USTelecom President Walter McCormick explained the group’s challenge in a speech to the Media Institute.
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.
Public Knowledge wants "to appear in this matter as an Intervenor in support of Respondents FCC and United States of America,” said the PK pleading. While PK asked to intervene in all of the appeals, the challenges are widely expected to be consolidated into a single case.
"Public Knowledge has long argued that Title II of the Communications Act is the FCC’s strongest and most logical source of authority for the Open Internet rules,” said PK Senior Staff Attorney Jodie Griffin. “Now that carriers have decided to litigate instead of moving forward, Public Knowledge is intervening to defend the rules in court.”
Free Press Policy Director Matt Wood said PK’s filing was made based on the deadline to file on the first of the cases -- filed by Alamo Broadband and USTelecom March 12 (see 1503230066). “We are highly likely to join in the proceedings at some point, but decided that not every potential intervenor had to file motions today,” Wood said.
Public Knowledge Senior Vice President Harold Feld said in a consolidated case intervenors have 30 days to file after the filing of the last petition, which so far is CenturyLink’s challenge, filed Friday (see 1504170059). "We didn't have any reason to wait and, to borrow the phrase from USTA, ‘out of an abundance of caution' we decided it made sense to just intervene in all cases," Feld said. USTA is the former name for USTelecom.
In his speech to the Media Institute, McCormick said USTelecom members aren't opposed to net neutrality. “We are challenging the FCC’s reclassification of Internet access to be a ‘telecommunications’ common carrier service -- and the imposition of 19th century railroad regulation on the 21st century Internet,” McCormick said, according to his prepared remarks. “It is bad policy -- bad for consumers, bad for innovation, bad for investment, bad for American competitiveness in the world economy.”
Congress has long recognized that common carrier regulation is “regulation for a bygone era,” which contributed to the financial collapse of the railroads and is “detrimental to investment,” McCormick said. “Indeed, by 1996 Congress had already repealed it for the traditional common carriers -- rail carriers, motor carriers and air carriers.” USTelecom’s position is neither partisan nor political, he said. “It is rooted in economics, the law and the lessons of history.” After having its rules for the Internet rejected in court, the FCC has decided to "simply call one ‘thing’ a different ‘thing,’ over which it has very broad power,” he said. Doing so violates the “express terms” of the Telecom Act and the Administrative Procedure Act’s standards for “reasoned decision making,” which mandate a showing of “changed circumstances,” he said.