The way the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) works is:
A fully populated commission is five unelected bureaucrat commissioners – one of whom also acts as chair.
The political party makeup thereof is:
Three commissioners of the current president’s party – two of the other party.
Except most of Democrat Joe Biden’s untenable tenure – was spent with a 2-2 commissioner split.
Until six days ago….
Gomez, we were told, was a “moderate” alternative to radical preceding nominee Gigi Sohn. Except there was zero actual evidence of Gomez being a moderate.…
Senate Republicans could have made that determination during Gomez’s hearings. But they’re Republicans, so….
“Something like this was the only question that would have really mattered at her confirmation hearing:
“‘If FCC Chairman Jessica Rosenworcel proposes having the Commission unilaterally impose Net Neutrality and/or reclassify the way the government regulates the Internet – without preceding Congressional legislation directing the Commission to do so – how will you vote?’
“Senators seemed to have brushed up against The Question….
“‘Federal Communications Nominee Says Congress Should Address Net Neutrality:
“‘When asked if the FCC should seek direction from Congress before addressing net neutrality,…Biden-backed nominee Anna Gomez said she would like to ‘help, if confirmed, with efforts towards legislation.’
“Except: ‘Should…the FCC seek direction from Congress?’ Is not ‘Must…the FCC seek direction from Congress?’
“This Senatorial exchange fails to fully preempt Gomez from voting to impose NN and Title II without legislation.”
Indeed it didn’t.
And so: The exact same day Gomez took the oath – Chair Rosenworcel pulled the trigger….
We are told we need Title II and Net Neutrality – to prevent Internet Service Providers (ISPs) from blocking legal Internet content.
Only ISPs have never, ever blocked legal Internet content.
Go ahead: Try an Internet search – looking for ISPs blocking content. You’ll find zero instances thereof.
We absolutely do not. Because ISP’s aren’t censoring.
Big Tech, however….
And here’s a bit of authoritarian irony…:
“The FCC’s livestream blocked comments during today’s speech announcing the return of (checks notes) net neutrality.
“The hypocrisy is incredibly rich.”
And of course….
So EVERYONE is blocking Internet content. And colluding to do it.
Except the ISPs.
Yet Big Gov’s Title II and NN power grabs – apply only to the ISPs.
This policy idiocy – is Bill Murray’s “Groundhog Day”…all over again:
“A weather man is reluctantly sent to cover a story about a weather forecasting ‘rat’ (as he calls it). This is his fourth year on the story, and he makes no effort to hide his frustration. On awaking the ‘following’ day, he discovers that it’s Groundhog Day again, and again, and again.”
We have been dealing with Democrat FCCs illegally jamming this idiocy down our throats – since all the way back in 2010….
Except – it’s always been illegal….
“A federal appeals court ruled that the FCC exceeded its authority in attempting to enforce ‘network neutrality’ rules aimed at preventing Internet providers from favoring certain types of traffic over others.”
The FCC can’t do Title II and/or NN – unless and until Congress passes a law expressly empowering the FCC to do Title II and/or NN.
That’s never, ever happened.
So what was illegal then – is still illegal now….
“Republican commissioner’s comments are a likely preview of the debate to come.”
There’s no actual debate.
“As it has before, the FCC wants to take that responsibility for itself, treating broadband as though it were a traditional common carrier service under Title II of the Communications Act and subjecting it to the same intrusive regulatory regime that has historically governed basic telephone service and public utilities like water, gas, and electricity.
“That would be a serious mistake. The US Supreme Court has made crystal clear, as recently as this June when it struck down President Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness program, that it will invalidate federal agency regulations on matters of major economic and political significance – what the court refers to as ‘major questions’ – unless Congress has given the agency specific, unambiguous authority to regulate on the subject.”
Unilaterally power grabbing the entirety of the Internet – would be a MAJOR imposition.
And would certainly qualify as a Supreme Court “major question.”
And since Congress has never expressly given the FCC power over this particular “major question?”
The FCC has zero legal authority to do anything at all about it.
Now – as then.