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 In a filing to the Supreme Court, the Trump administration said the question for the court was "whether the now-superseded 2015 order was invalid because it exceeded the FCC's statutory authority, was arbitrary and capricious, was promulgated without adequate public notice, or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."
the current Supreme Court is stacked against government regulation of any kind. That is by design. We've been electing right wing presidents since I was born (yes, both Obama and Clinton, especially Clinton, were on the right wing). As the saying goes, Elections have consequences. America continues to choose candidates who oppose government regulation and favor leaving things up to the markets. We should stop acting surprised when that happens just because they're striking down a regulation we happen to like.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
In a filing to the Supreme Court, the Trump administration said the question for the court was "whether the now-superseded 2015 order was invalid because it exceeded the FCC's statutory authority, was arbitrary and capricious, was promulgated without adequate public notice, or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.
Germany here. This kind of ... well ... dictating, is when our government back then crossed the line into a dictatorship.
Like with an event horizon, you aren't aware you crossed it, at the time of it happening. But later on, you realize that this was the point where you would have had to stop it or die trying.
So please take care of yourselves over there. Especially the convenient scapegoat fringe groups. Don't believe what you are being told about "communists/socialists/democrats/republicans/libertarians/muslims/christians/jews".
... assuming repealing Net Neutrality will lead to less high speed internet use, which is not at all certain.
Actually the players backing the repeal of Net neutrality want you to use the Internet as much as you want But they want to throttle the competition and keep you locked in their pay-walled garden
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.
Combined with Sessions religious liberty finally we will be the Christian State that real Americans knew we should always be. Degeneracy will no longer be allowed in America! #MAGA
checks out.
No case or controversy; SCOTUS is going to tell the administration not to bother them with this.
What specific event or action has lead you to believe, the Separation is threatened in any way?..
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
I believe this is an attempt to curb free speech on the internet. You could imagine a broadband company that doesn't like a certain type of content asking an outrageous amount to allow that content access to the fiber. Who could say that legislation couldn't be put in place as financial incentive to allow certain types of content to be allowed on the fiber either. Does that violate free speech? I think it's unclear, free speech is allowed in the scenario, you just have to pay a really high premium.
Booming? I'll believe that when wages go up at the rate of inflation.
Hence why a exceptionally good education system is necessary for a democracy to endure.
Computers are useless: they can only give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso
Use of a comma that is so bad that, Oxford-wise, it isn't even wrong.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
I believe this is an attempt to curb free speech on the internet.
That's exactly what it is. Too many people are becoming informed and educating themselves now policy decisions can be made to keep people wasting each others time watching cat vids on facebook whilst education and things important to running a free society are kept inaccessible.
Your post should be MODed UP instead of down, however that really shows how this is going to work.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
Well Trump's added a corporatocrat and an executive power maximalist to the supreme court, so if there's ever a time they'll gleefully take this demand, it's now.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Federal rules can be changed. Every government gets to set its own rules.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
How did /. degenerate into such a bunch of loonies so fast, as demonstrated by the posts here? My bet is professional agitators. Probably not Russian but just as nefarious. Anyone who believes the 90% of the posts here that are loony lefty drivel should be ashamed of themselves.
Hence why a exceptionally good education system is necessary for a democracy to endure.
Educational levels are irrelevant when discussing the fact that pure democracies are a tyranny of the 51% over the 49%.
It's not any lack of education, it's base human nature that is the fly in the ointment of a direct democracy.
Those who seriously promote/push the idea of a direct democracy are either woefully under-educated themselves, or they have an ulterior political/ideological motive like social/political disruption of the sort the Russians have been in the news for recently.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
It's not any lack of education, it's base human nature that is the fly in the ointment of a direct democracy.
I should have added that both socialism and communism also fail for the same reason...base human nature. Both socialism and communism are authoritarian by their very nature. Most major life decisions are made by those in power...where you work and at what sort of job, what kind and level of education you receive, where you'll live, how much you will earn, how much food you receive, even how many children you may have.
Anytime you put people in authority over others without unavoidable and direct consequences for abusing that power, those people placed in authority will generally become increasingly authoritarian, capricious, and cruel as was shown by Milgram's experiment.
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
But all the other shit? Including the new tax breaks? They LOVE that. Not one hates the executive order stream.
Hence why a exceptionally good education system is necessary for a democracy to endure.
Trouble is, what looks like a good system to one set of jokers looks terrible to the other set of clowns, and visa versa.
His ignorance covered the whole earth like a blanket, and there was hardly a hole in it anywhere. - Mark Twain
Until you, English-speakers, figure out your own rules for commas, I'm going to stick to the rules of Ukrainian, thank you very much. In particular, denoting a subordinate clause with comma(s) is a must...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.