The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit will determine whether the Federal Communications Commission's new neutrality rules are legal, a judicial panel said this week.
That news doesn't bode well for the controversial neutrality rules, because the court in D.C. has already ruled that the FCC isn't able to enforce open Internet principles. A three-judge panel of that
court said last year that the FCC shouldn't have sanctioned Comcast for throttling peer-to-peer traffic. The FCC lacked authority, the court ruled, because it had earlier classified broadband as an
information service, not a telecommunications service.
The net neutrality regulations passed last year are almost certainly vulnerable for the same reason: The FCC didn't reclassify broadband
before enacting them.
Neutrality advocates tried to improve their odds of having the case heard by a different court by filing their own challenges to the FCC's order. Free Press brought a
case in the 1st Circuit, while Media Access Project filed cases in the 2nd Circuit, 4th Circuit and 9th Circuit. Those groups said the FCC's rules -- which impose fewer restrictions on wireless
providers -- aren't strong enough.
Verizon, which aims to block the rules, sued in the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
The rules themselves largely preserve the status quo --
at least for wireline providers. The regulations prohibit wireline providers from degrading or blocking traffic and also appear to prohibit them from agreeing to prioritize content for companies who
pay extra. The regulations ban wireless providers from degrading or blocking traffic and competing apps, but apparently leave them free to forge deals with content providers.