Fiber and wireless proponents faced off in comments this week on a California Public Utilities Commission rulemaking to develop state rules for distributing dollars from NTIA’s broadband, equity, access and deployment (BEAD) program (docket R.23-02-016). They disagreed on how high California should set its Extremely High Cost Per Location Threshold (EHCT), which will be used to determine what areas can get non-fiber broadband service. Commenters also debated how much the CPUC should add to requirements from the BEAD notice of funding opportunity (NOFO) and how much the state agency should rely on the FCC’s national map to determine what areas are served.
The FTC is willing to suspend its privacy rulemaking if Congress enacts a new federal privacy law, Chair Lina Khan told House Commerce Committee members Tuesday.
Top Republicans on the House and Senate Communications subcommittees told us their recent broadband oversight moves weren't unfairly partisan and they seek a more critical assessment of the Biden administration’s implementation of connectivity programs from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and COVID-19 aid measures to prevent appropriations misuse. The subpanels' top Democrats and other stakeholders told us they’re not particularly concerned so far about the tone of GOP queries but are continuing to monitor how they compare with Congress’ past oversight of the controversial Broadband Technology Opportunities Program and other initiatives.
T-Mobile shows no dire situation warranting injunction of California’s shift to connections-based contribution for state USF, the California Public Utilities Commission said Friday at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The agency urged the court to deny the carrier and its subsidiaries’ emergency request to freeze the CPUC order requiring a $1.11 monthly flat fee as of April 1. “No lives hang in the balance,” wrote the CPUC. “No one is threatened with deportation.”
The U.S. Supreme Court’s Axon decision calls into question the constitutionality of the FTC’s quasi-judicial authority and will have ramifications for Chair Lina Khan’s “aggressive” rulemaking agenda, legal experts said Monday.
U.S. District Judge Kevin Castel for Southern New York signed an order Thursday (docket 1:21-md-03010) granting plaintiff Inform leave to file within 21 days an amended complaint in the massive digital ad tech antitrust multidistrict litigation against Google consolidated under the judge. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation transferred Inform’s action for inclusion in Castel’s MDL on Feb. 23. It had been pending in the Northern District of Georgia to which the 11th U.S. Circuit Appeals Court had remanded it. Inform sought leave to conform its complaint to Castel’s earlier rulings in the MDL. Google opposed Inform’s application as untimely, a waste of time and futile (see 2304110019), but Castel disagreed. Google’s “futility argument” was premised on its assertion that Inform lacks standing, said the judge. But the 11th Circuit ruled Inform “adequately alleged” Article III standing and antitrust standing, said the judge. Inform “acted in a reasonably timely manner following remand” by the 11th Circuit, said the judge’s order. “Any defect in the pleading may be raised on a motion to dismiss.” The court “accepts good faith representation” that Inform intends to conform its pleading to the court's previous rulings, said the order. “Any new or additional theories of liability should be highlighted in a marked copy of the pleading also filed within 21 days,” it said. Google may file a pre-motion letter in support of a motion to dismiss 21 days after the filing of Inform’s amended pleading, it said. Inform will respond to the pre-motion letter seven days later.
District courts have jurisdiction to hear lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of administrative law judge proceedings at the FTC and other federal agencies, a unanimous Supreme Court ruled Friday in dockets 21-86 (see 2211070049) and 21-1239 (see 2211070062).
The FCC misrepresented the Standard/Tegna deal as complex and refused to engage with the broadcasters, and Friday’s Supreme Court opinion on agency adjudications underscores that the hearing process is unconstitutional, said Standard General, Cox Media Group and Tegna in their final response filing supporting their petition for mandamus at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (see 2304110072).
Industry and advocacy organizations sought time and flexibility to comply with new rules for the FCC's implementation of the Safe Connections Act and improving access to communications services for survivors of domestic violence. Comments on the NPRM posted Thursday in docket 22-238 showed broad support for the commission's proposals and sought minor clarifications (see 2303130007).
The FCC misrepresented the Standard/Tegna deal as complex and refused to engage with the broadcasters, and Friday’s Supreme Court opinion on agency adjudications underscores that the hearing process is unconstitutional, said Standard General, Cox Media Group and Tegna in their final response filing supporting their petition for mandamus at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit (see 2304110072).