Clarence Thomas regrets ruling that Ajit Pai used to kill net neutrality
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas now says he was wrong on the Brand X case that helped the FCC deregulate broadband. Justice Thomas wrote the majority opinion on Brand X in 2005.
I am far from qualified to opine on the legal issues and technicalities, but I honor Judge Thomas for what he did. Also, it is clear the matter bears significantly on the meaning of terms and the nature of government. In the Brand X case the Supreme Court faced the question of whether broadband was classified as an information service or telecommunications. The Court's decision didn't choose one and exclude the other, but allowed both.
A brief search for examples of information service gave cable modem and text messaging. Telecommunication includes communications by radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable. For anybody interested Wikipedia has pages on the FCC and net neutrality in the USA.
The Brand X case has allowed the FCC to subsequently change its classification decision multiple times. The FCC is an independent agency of the United States government. This means that "while constitutionally managed by the executive branch, are independent of presidential control, usually because the president's power to dismiss the agency head or a member is limited" (Wikipedia). Judge Thomas regrets that the precedent of Brand X granted too much power to an independent agency and too little power to judges to decide how the law should be interpreted for a particular court case.
"Thomas explained his new position over 11 pages, but it boils down to one fact: he now believes that Brand X disrupted the government's checks-and-balances system by preventing courts from blocking federal-agency decisions that conflict with US law. Judges, not officials at government agencies, are responsible for interpreting the laws issued by Congress, he noted."
No comments:
Post a Comment