The FCC Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau on Friday approved the applications of Applied Development and Sorenson for access to the telecommunications relay services numbering directory as qualified direct video entities. The agency allows TRS direct video providers to seek access to the directory “to enable more effective direct video communication using American Sign Language between consumers with hearing or speech disabilities and customer support call centers,” said the notice about Sorenson. Qualified providers must demonstrate “a legitimate need for such access and an awareness of its regulatory obligations,” it added: “These obligations include compliance with the rules and regulations governing [video relay services] providers’ access to and use of the Directory, the instructions of the TRS Numbering administrator, and the applicable standards pertaining to privacy, security, reliability, and interoperability.” The Applied Development notice has the same language.
Parts of the FCC’s website appeared down Friday. Throughout much of the day, attempts to access the Daily Digest yielded the messages: “FCC Website Error" and "An unexpected error occurred with your request. Please check back later.” An agency spokesperson didn’t comment.
Two law professors told the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday it should reverse the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' 9-7 en banc decision, which found the USF contribution factor is a "misbegotten tax.” SCOTUS has agreed to hear the case, FCC v. Consumers’ Research, which potentially has broad implications, experts say (see 2412100060). Look no further than a 1938 brief by then-Solicitor General Robert Jackson, urged Gerard Magliocca, professor at the Indiana University Law School, and John Barrett, professor of law at St. John’s University, in an amicus brief Friday. They wrote that Jackson, later appointed to SCOTUS, “proposed an elegant solution to the issue now before the Court" when he argued in Currin v. Wallace that "the non-delegation doctrine applies only when Congress delegates power to the President" and "that congressional delegations to federal agencies, independent boards, and private actors are not subject to" the doctrine. Acknowledging that SCOTUS decided Currin without addressing Jackson's theory, they said the court should read his "thoughtful brief" and reverse the 5th Circuit.
Sens. Ed Markey, D-Mass., and Ron Wyden, D-Ore., slammed the ruling of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (see 2501020047) vacating the FCC’s April net neutrality order. In a statement released Thursday, the lawmakers said, “Without net neutrality, consumers, small businesses, and innovators alike will face increased costs, reduced choice, and less competition. It is a lose-lose-lose.” They added, “This ruling upends the fundamental principle that internet service providers should not act as gatekeepers, favoring certain users, content, or services over others." Markey and Wyden said the decision also shows why the U.S. Supreme Court was wrong when it overturned the Chevron doctrine. The opinion “makes basic errors about communications technologies, neatly illustrating why expert regulators, not judges, are best positioned to make complex public policy decisions.” Andrew Schwartzman, senior counsel at the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society, in an email wrote that the opinion “misreads” the 1996 Telecom Act “in finding that broadband internet service is not subject to the regulatory requirements of Title II of the Communications Act.” Among other concerns, “that deprives the FCC of the power to protect national security, insure that competitive broadband suppliers can have access to necessary distribution outlets and endangers wireless access programs for low-income consumers.” The “good news” was in the judges didn’t do, Schwartzman said. The three-judge panel “gave a narrow reading to the impact of the recent Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision overruling the Chevron doctrine,” he said. The court also didn’t “rely on the carriers’ ‘major question doctrine’ arguments, so that the FCC will retain the power to regulate various aspects of broadband service without future Congressional action.” But Seth Cooper, Free State Foundation director-communications policy studies, said the court offered a “straightforward reading” of the Communications Act. The opinion was “refreshing because it shows how traditional tools of statutory interpretation can be used to resolve even seemingly technical questions like the regulatory classification of broadband,” Cooper emailed: “It’s the type of decision that eluded us so long as lower courts were subject to the ‘Chevron doctrine’ and effectively required to rationalize even far-fetched agency interpretations or re-interpretations of supposed ambiguous statutory provisions.”
Petitions denying Skydance Media's proposed $8 billion purchase of Paramount Global lack standing, call for conditions that would violate the First Amendment, and also raise concerns that are outside FCC jurisdiction, said Paramount and Skydance in an opposition filing posted Thursday in docket 24-275.
NTIA’s Commerce Spectrum Management Advisory Committee may have fallen by the wayside, with many questions about its future unanswered heading into the second Donald Trump presidency. Several CSMAC members told us they reapplied for membership but have heard little in response.
Federated Wireless representatives offered their take on proposed changes to citizens broadband radio service rules during a meeting with an aide to FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez (see 2408160031). They expressed “support for codification of the processes that are being used to manage CBRS spectrum access, greater harmonization of the CBRS rules with adjacent bands, and strengthening of the rules regarding coexistence management,” said a filing this week in docket 17-258. The changes “will preserve the core principles of spectrum sharing, encourage continued investment, and ensure that CBRS remains a flexible, forward-looking platform for wireless innovation,” Federated said.
The International Center for Law & Economics (ICLE) told the FCC that T-Mobile’s proposed buy of “substantially all” of UScellular’s wireless operations, including some of its spectrum (see 2405280047), should have little effect on wireless competition. “UScellular is a struggling regional carrier with significant structural disadvantages compared to national carriers like AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile,” said a filing posted Thursday in docket 24-286: “T-Mobile sets its plan prices nationally and does not adjust them based on localized competition, including UScellular’s presence, pricing, or service offerings and quality.” ICLE said given UScellular’s size, “limited footprint, and uncompetitive pricing,” it “plays no role as a ‘maverick’ disrupting the market and is unlikely to do so into the foreseeable future.”
Incoming House Commerce Committee Chairman Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., said Thursday he's naming Joel Miller, former chief of staff to former FCC commissioner Mike O’Rielly, as the panel’s chief counsel. Miller, who was previously Guthrie’s deputy chief of staff and legislative director, since leaving the FCC worked at LinkedIn and the Information Technology Industry Council. As chief counsel, Miller will manage "the policy and legislative strategy" of House Commerce and oversee the Communications Subcommittee and other subpanels, Guthrie’s office said: He will also “coordinate the Committee’s policy and legislative work with Members, leadership, and the broader Republican Conference to advance the House Republican legislative agenda.” Guthrie said he’s naming former House Oversight Committee Deputy Staff Director Jessica Donlon as Commerce’s general counsel and former Small Business Committee Communications Director Matt VanHyfte as Commerce's communications director.
Consumers’ Research asked the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to vacate the FCC’s USF contribution factor for Q1 of this year, set by the agency last month. The group, and its allies, had already asked the FCC to zero out the contribution factor (see 2412130016), calling it “an unconstitutional tax raised and spent by an unaccountable federal agency.” The 5th Circuit earlier found in a 9-7 en banc decision that the contribution factor is a "misbegotten tax.” That decision is before the U.S. Supreme Court (see 2412100060). “Congress’s standardless delegation to the FCC of legislative authority to raise and spend nearly unlimited money via the Universal Service Fund violates Article I, section 1 of the U.S. Constitution,” said the filing with the court: USF charges “are taxes and therefore Congress’s standardless delegation to the FCC of authority to raise and spend nearly unlimited taxes violates Article I, section 8” of the Constitution.