Slashdot Mirror
Trump Administration Tells Supreme Court To Wipe Out Decision Upholding Net Neutrality (hollywoodreporter.com)
Repealing net neutrality wasn't enough for the Trump administration. Today, the administration asked the U.S. Supreme Court to vacate a 2016 appeal court ruling that had upheld Obama era net neutrality rules that barred ISPs from blocking, throttling, or prioritizing content. Reuters reports: The request was made even though the Federal Communications Commission voted along party lines to toss out the 2015 rules late last year, rendering the fight over their legality moot. In a filing to the Supreme Court, the Trump administration said the question for the court was "whether the now-superseded 2015 order was invalid because it exceeded the FCC's statutory authority, was arbitrary and capricious, was promulgated without adequate public notice, or violated the First Amendment."
In a filing to the Supreme Court, the Trump administration said the question for the court was "whether the now-superseded 2015 order was invalid because it exceeded the FCC's statutory authority, was arbitrary and capricious, was promulgated without adequate public notice, or violated the First Amendment."
Sounds like they want clarification on how, exactly, the FCC fucked up so they can use that against them in the future.
A little editorial work done on the title of the post.
The title and the first line of the linked article: "Trump administration asks Supreme Court "
Title on Slashdot: "Trump Administration Tells Supreme Court "
That one-word change is a big difference, suggesting one branch of the gov't telling the other what to do.
America continues to choose candidates who oppose government regulation and favor leaving things up to the markets.
The democratic party seems to have the centrists and the more left people, while the republican party has the right, and the far right, and well Donald Trump, who seems to mostly be about worship of Donald Trump.
The last election had people:
1. Angry and wanting to vote someone in who was angry at the same people they were angry at. They have been told to be angry at the democrats/clintons/etc for some time. Trump's whole birthirism spiel was just a gigantic fan for the flames of prejudice. "This one is other." "He had no right to ever be in charge, kinda vibe." Much of the Russian crap helped with this, one way, or another. A lot of this is voting against their best interests, but that is where we are.
2. Believing the two main parties were nearly as equal as far as their lives went. Many of those stayed home. Some might have voted for Trump because well your back to 1. This is false, but yah, we are here. Our voter participation is crap. I'd like to say those people are getting a wakeup call, but yah, not seeing it.
3. You had a lot of people who thought trump was aweful/unqualified/lacking ethics voting on the other side, and that's about it. If you thought Trump was one of those things well Hillary was basically generic democrat to everyone else, including me. There was nothing particularly wrong with the choice and it was vastly better than the alternative, but hardly inspiring. Some likely stayed home because she was probably more of a republican than Donald Trump is. That was no doubt a mistake, since her policies would have been far better. Hell, she stood up to Putin, which is something Trump can't say. That is partly why she got attacked. I think the part of this group that didn't show up, might show up better next time. Actually come to think of it, part of the reason Trump might be refusing to attack Putin is this is what happened to Hillary. It makes sense, though I doubt that is all of it.
The interesting thing will be is whether the delta causes enough of a shift in november to overcome partisan gerrymandering. I think you have to get about 6% in favor of the democrats for the republican seats to start falling like dominoes. Someone can correct me if they have a better number.