Feed: Slashdot
Feed Link: https://slashdot.org/
---

Title: Will California Gut Its Net Neutrality Law to Comply with Trump Admin
Demands?

Link: https://yro.slashdot.org/story/26/09/18/00232...

In 2021, America approved $65 billion to fund broadband internet services as
part of President Biden's Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. But Trump's
administration announced they'd withhold funds from states with net
neutrality protections... States could object and sue the government, Ars
Technica reported last October, "but even a successful lawsuit could take
years and leave unserved homes without broadband for the foreseeable future."
So where does that leave California's net neutrality laws? Ars Technica asks.
California expect to spend about $1.4 billion to deploy broadband to 270,571
locations... Similar to federal net neutrality rules repealed during the
first Trump administration, California's law prohibits ISPs from blocking or
throttling lawful traffic and says ISPs may not require fees from websites or
online services to deliver or prioritize their traffic to Internet users.
While the first Trump administration lost its attempt to preempt state net
neutrality laws, the second Trump administration is trying to achieve a
similar result by making federal broadband money conditional on whether
states agree not to enforce net neutrality... California and Illinois are the
only states that haven't finalized their funding, according to the BEAD
progress dashboard maintained by the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration (NTIA)... California could try to continue
enforcing its net neutrality law even while accepting the federal funding, a
strategy that would involve another long court battle over its right to
regulate broadband providers. This would be difficult, as the Trump
administration is requiring states that accept grant funding to commit that
they won't enforce net neutrality rules... [N]early 30 advocacy groups that
focus on access to technology are treating the vote as a significant
milestone and urged state leaders to defend California's net neutrality law
in a letter yesterday... Winning a court battle would become much more
difficult after the state accepts the money [according to Paul Goodman, legal
counsel for the Center for Accessible Technology]. Goodman said the CPUC
should delay the vote and that California should file a lawsuit arguing that
the NTIA-imposed condition is illegal. In addition to net neutrality, Goodman
said California may be giving up other regulatory authority over companies,
like AT&T and Verizon, because the NTIA requirement forbids rate
regulation and "utility-style rules on broadband Internet service" in
general... Goodman said the exemption from state laws would last for up to 14
years. This is because ISPs receiving grants would have four years to deploy
the required broadband networks, and the extended period of performance lasts
another 10 years... AT&T is already trying to get out of state
obligations related to its basic phone service in California, as we've
reported... [Also at stake is whether "ISPs themselves get to pick the price
of the mandated low-cost broadband offerings," the article points out.] The
letter from 30 advocacy groups to California state leaders argues accepting
the money "would set a dangerous precedent for the federal government to use
federal funding as a cudgel that forces states in line with its agenda... If
California were to allow this funding to be used as leverage, there is no
telling what other resources the administration would confidently seek to
exploit." Thursday California's Public Utility Commission did vote to approve
the plan, but a spokesperson earlier told Ars Technica their vote "does not
address subgrantee agreements, or the conditions the NTIA requires be
included in subgrantee agreements."

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

---
VRSS v2.1.180528