3 Infrastructure, Contractor Groups Petition to Vacate FCC’s Digital Discrimination Order
Three infrastructure owner and contractor groups petitioned the U.S. Appeals Court for the D.C. Circuit Tuesday for review of the FCC’s digital discrimination order, released Nov. 20 and published Jan. 22 in the Federal Register, on grounds that it gives…
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.
the commission unprecedented authority to regulate the broadband internet economy. The Wireless Infrastructure Association (WIA), the Power & Communications Contractors Association (PCCA) and NATE filed the petition. It was immediately transferred to the 8th Circuit where it was consolidated with 13 previous petitions under a Feb. 9 order from the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (see 2402120077). It was docketed as case number 24-1411. The Nov. 20 order “demonstrates the FCC’s failure to retain sight of the scope of its mission assigned by Congress,” the petition said. Entities like infrastructure owners and contractors “play an important role in advancing the goal of facilitating equal access to broadband service by making high-quality modern infrastructure available as quickly as possible for the use by telecommunications and broadband providers,” it said. The infrastructure provided is generally “neutral host,” allowing “any number of providers to place equipment on the sites, increasing broadband access and improving service,” it said. But the infrastructure owners and contractors represented by WIA, PCCA and NATE don’t sell broadband services directly to end users and therefore don’t have the ability “to control the place and manner of broadband access,” it said. The order ultimately also fails to “meaningfully address” WIA’s argument that the order’s definition of “covered entities” exceeds the FCC’s “statutory language and mandate” that Congress intended, it said.