Amid negotiation struggles over HR-2666, House Communications Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., plans to file an amendment to try to resolve some of the subcommittee Democratic concerns, and Democrats are planning to file their own amendments to counter the bill. That is one of two House measures on the FCC net neutrality order poised to advance this week. Commerce Committee lawmakers delivered opening statements Monday for a full committee markup of what has been the partisan No Rate Regulation of Broadband Internet Access Act (HR-2666), with a vote set for Tuesday at 10 a.m. The full chamber is geared up for what is likely a Wednesday House vote on the bipartisan Small Business Broadband Deployment Act (HR-4596).

Amid negotiation struggles over HR-2666, House Communications Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, R-Ore., plans to file an amendment to try to resolve some of the subcommittee Democratic concerns, and Democrats are planning to file their own amendments to counter the bill. That is one of two House measures on the FCC net neutrality order poised to advance this week. Commerce Committee lawmakers delivered opening statements Monday for a full committee markup of what has been the partisan No Rate Regulation of Broadband Internet Access Act (HR-2666), with a vote set for Tuesday at 10 a.m. The full chamber is geared up for what is likely a Wednesday House vote on the bipartisan Small Business Broadband Deployment Act (HR-4596).

The court order forcing Apple to help the FBI unlock an iPhone 5C used by a gunman in the California mass shooting in December applies only to that phone and "does not compel [the company] to unlock other iPhones or to give the government a universal 'master key' or 'back door,'" argued DOJ lawyers in a 35-page filing Thursday countering Apple's motion to dismiss the case (see 1603020061). The lawyers said the All Writs Act (AWA), which the government is applying in the court order, isn't "dusty and forgotten" as Apple has described it, but "vital" to the U.S. legal system and "regularly invoked." They said the Supreme Court rejected similar policy arguments in 1977's U.S. vs. New York Telephone that Apple now raises: "that the AWA could not be read so broadly; that it was for Congress to decide whether to provide such authority; and that relying on the AWA was a dangerous step down a slippery slope ending in arbitrary police powers." DOJ lawyers said "fears have proved unfounded" in the 40 years since that decision. The order instructs Apple to create "a narrow, targeted piece of software" for just that one iPhone within the company's own secure headquarters, the lawyers said (see 1603010013). Justice said the device is owned by the County of San Bernardino, which is where the shooting took place, and was used by "now-dead terrorist Syed Rizwan Farook, who also consented to its being searched as part of his employment agreement with the County. In short, the Order invades no one's privacy and raises no Fourth Amendment concerns."

The court order forcing Apple to help the FBI unlock an iPhone 5C used by a gunman in the California mass shooting in December applies only to that phone and "does not compel [the company] to unlock other iPhones or to give the government a universal 'master key' or 'back door,'" argued DOJ lawyers in a 35-page filing Thursday countering Apple's motion to dismiss the case (see 1603020061). The lawyers said the All Writs Act (AWA), which the government is applying in the court order, isn't "dusty and forgotten" as Apple has described it, but "vital" to the U.S. legal system and "regularly invoked." They said the Supreme Court rejected similar policy arguments in 1977's U.S. vs. New York Telephone that Apple now raises: "that the AWA could not be read so broadly; that it was for Congress to decide whether to provide such authority; and that relying on the AWA was a dangerous step down a slippery slope ending in arbitrary police powers." DOJ lawyers said "fears have proved unfounded" in the 40 years since that decision. The order instructs Apple to create "a narrow, targeted piece of software" for just that one iPhone within the company's own secure headquarters, the lawyers said (see 1603010013). Justice said the device is owned by the County of San Bernardino, which is where the shooting took place, and was used by "now-dead terrorist Syed Rizwan Farook, who also consented to its being searched as part of his employment agreement with the County. In short, the Order invades no one's privacy and raises no Fourth Amendment concerns."

The court order forcing Apple to help the FBI unlock an iPhone 5C used by a gunman in the California mass shooting in December applies only to that phone and "does not compel [the company] to unlock other iPhones or to give the government a universal 'master key' or 'back door,'" argued DOJ lawyers in a 35-page filing Thursday countering Apple's motion to dismiss the case (see 1603020061). The lawyers said the All Writs Act (AWA), which the government is applying in the court order, isn't "dusty and forgotten" as Apple has described it, but "vital" to the U.S. legal system and "regularly invoked." They said the Supreme Court rejected similar policy arguments in 1977's U.S. vs. New York Telephone that Apple now raises: "that the AWA could not be read so broadly; that it was for Congress to decide whether to provide such authority; and that relying on the AWA was a dangerous step down a slippery slope ending in arbitrary police powers." DOJ lawyers said "fears have proved unfounded" in the 40 years since that decision. The order instructs Apple to create "a narrow, targeted piece of software" for just that one iPhone within the company's own secure headquarters, the lawyers said (see 1603010013). Justice said the device is owned by the County of San Bernardino, which is where the shooting took place, and was used by "now-dead terrorist Syed Rizwan Farook, who also consented to its being searched as part of his employment agreement with the County. In short, the Order invades no one's privacy and raises no Fourth Amendment concerns."

In the March 9 issue of the CBP Customs Bulletin (Vol. 50, No. 10) (here), CBP published notices that propose to revoke or modify rulings and similar treatment for cereal bars and car parts.

Experts said they question whether the FCC will even consider steering clear of imposing bright-line rules on requirements for ISPs to safeguard subscriber data Friday despite comments on an FCC call with reporters Thursday. Others took the agency at its word and believe it remains open-minded. Chairman Tom Wheeler circulated an NPRM Thursday for a vote at the FCC’s March 31 open meeting (see 1603100019).

Experts said they question whether the FCC will even consider steering clear of imposing bright-line rules on requirements for ISPs to safeguard subscriber data Friday despite comments on an FCC call with reporters Thursday. Others took the agency at its word and believe it remains open-minded. Chairman Tom Wheeler circulated an NPRM Thursday for a vote at the FCC’s March 31 open meeting (see 1603100019).

Five House Commerce Committee Republicans endorsed Charter Communications’ proposed buys of Time Warner Cable and Bright House Networks. “This merger will mean new jobs and more cutting-edge broadband services to communities,” said Rep. Pete Olson, R-Texas, who led the Thursday letter to the Justice Department and the FCC. “I hope the Justice Department and FCC will act quickly on this transaction.” Reps. Chris Collins of New York, Renee Ellmers of North Carolina, Billy Long of Missouri and Bill Flores of Texas also signed the letter. The deal’s approval would mean “significant benefits to the public and our economy,” they said, citing Charter’s record of infrastructure investment and focus on growing its U.S. workforce. Several members of Congress have raised concerns about the deal, which recently was endorsed by two other House lawmakers representing districts in Missouri (see 1603040059).

Five House Commerce Committee Republicans endorsed Charter Communications’ proposed buys of Time Warner Cable and Bright House Networks. “This merger will mean new jobs and more cutting-edge broadband services to communities,” said Rep. Pete Olson, R-Texas, who led the Thursday letter to the Justice Department and the FCC. “I hope the Justice Department and FCC will act quickly on this transaction.” Reps. Chris Collins of New York, Renee Ellmers of North Carolina, Billy Long of Missouri and Bill Flores of Texas also signed the letter. The deal’s approval would mean “significant benefits to the public and our economy,” they said, citing Charter’s record of infrastructure investment and focus on growing its U.S. workforce. Several members of Congress have raised concerns about the deal, which recently was endorsed by two other House lawmakers representing districts in Missouri (see 1603040059).