Slashdot Mirror
Gov. Jerry Brown Signs Bill To Restore Net Neutrality in California; the Trump Administration is Already Trying To Block It (nbcnews.com)
California Gov. Jerry Brown signed into law on Sunday a bill to restore net neutrality protections that President Donald Trump's Federal Communications Commission killed late last year. From a report: The new law prohibits internet service providers, or ISPs, from blocking or slowing access to legal online content, demanding special fees from websites to prioritize their traffic or charging customers for special exemptions to caps on their data use. Brown signed the measure without comment, setting up almost certain showdowns with both ISPs and the FCC, which barred states from setting their own rules in its repeal last December of protections instituted during the administration of President Barack Obama. The U.S. Justice Department quickly filed a federal action in U.S. District Court in Sacramento to block the new law Sunday night. In a statement, Attorney General Jeff Sessions said: "Under the Constitution, states do not regulate interstate commerce -- the federal government does. Once again the California legislature has enacted an extreme and illegal state law attempting to frustrate federal policy." Brown also signed A.B. 1999, which makes it easier for local governments to build community broadband and offer competitive high-speed fiber.
https://www.reuters.com/articl...
"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Justice Department late on Sunday filed suit after California Governor Jerry Brown signed legislation to restore open internet protections known as net neutrality in the state after the Trump administration repealed the rules in December 2017."
That's a bit of a dangerous tack to take.. the obvious rebuttal is that the internet is international and the feds have no right to regulate it either.. I mean I know the US is horribly egocentric and doesn't like thinking of other countries as having rights or sovereignty.. but they do and it's a possible argument that Calif could bring up to counter the internet being "interstate"
First of all, they are not regulating interstate commerce. They are only regulating how ISPs get to do business in california. The ISPs can do as they like in other states.
Second, and more importantly, the FCC has no power to regulate the internet - they specifically refuted that. So they have no standing to bring suit. Can't have it both ways, Agitator Pai.
On the one hand you take life too seriously, and on the other, you do not take playful existence seriously enough. Seth
The Feds will lose. The law is structured so that it doesn't do anything regarding "interstate commerce", and other states are lining up to follow California's lead.
The Feds will lose the same way they're losing on legal marijuana.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Not sure whats happening atm on legal weed, but a lot of the success came from the Obama Administration ordering the DEA to not to interfere with States that want to do their own thing.
Heres the big irony about all this;- The GOP likes to talk big game about "State rights", but apparently that only applies to states that dont piss off the GOPs party donors.
Really, its "Party donor rights over you" that are advocated for not state rights.
Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
The Fed's have the right to regulate, but chose not to do so. The FCC has repeatedly stated the Internet is outside their jurisdiction and Congress refused to pass any laws rescinding that. Bush drew up an executive order eliminating Federal controls. Don't blame California for exploiting this.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
It's one of the slowest in the world - Britain has faster and I swear they still use cans and string - and one of the most expensive, whilst also being one of the most restrictive.
Comcast gets away with shutting down rivals by cutting their cables. Does anyone think you'd get away with that in Europe?
Verizon ignores an agreement on unlimited traffic in an emergency, placing lives at risk. I don't care about excuses and I don't care if they don't like Monday's. Deliberately placing state and federal workers in danger is what the beltway sniper did.
California isn't even making a dent in this, California is only drawing a line and saying things can't get worse in a few rather restricted ways. If California was serious, it would build a municipal Internet and damn the corporate sector. What's the Fed going to do, invade?
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
the other way to look at it is the relationship between isp and customer is local and in-state, as is the connection between them, not inter-state; and not all traffic is 'commerce'.. so the (current) fcc can fuck off. also the limits fcc try to set are ones that should be in legislation, passed by house and senate and signed by a president, not arbitrary 'policy' or 'fcc rules' set by three partisan dickhead puppets.
if an isp wishes to do business IN california, they get to play by california rules. and no isp will give up their customers in the most populous state and the 5th largest economy in the world.
california has other specific regulations companies (and their products and services) follow, even when those companies are not california-based... and even when 'commerce' is involved. fcc has no fucking authority here to tell the states they can't pass net neutrality laws of their own.
the courts will see that, and by the time it hits scotus, trump will be gone, perhaps convicted and playing peek-a-boo with the deformed dick of a guy named butch.. and his appointments to federal posts will be nullified, removed, impeached or otherwise replaced.
It's the alcohol fueled serial rapist part that's the problem for Kavanaugh, that and his gambling addictions, and his violation of oaths about telling the truth, and his violations of as a US district judge (the whole text, really) due to hyper partisanship and disregard for the rights of others.
Remember all those arguments the FCC made for giving up regulatory power over the internet so they could remove rules they didn't like?
Well, this is what you asked for... no federal regulation. They just didn't think through the part where that left the door open for states to enact their own regulations.
Suck it, Ajit.
How come Republicans are have such a hard-on for states rights when states do something evil like voter suppression but change their minds when they do something good like cannabis legalization or net neutrality?
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
Sure but the democrats are open about being federalists. It's the republicans that claim to be ideologically committed to state rights
Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
Ok to expand on this. Personally I think there's a pox on both the houses. The republicans voted in a borderline lunatic who claimed he'd "drain the swamp" then filled his entire cabinet with lobbyists and Wall Street crooks and has spent his entire time gazing in the mirror and throwing tantrums because being a public servant is not the same as being a CEO. The dems hadthe *perfect* candidate in Bernie and then fucking sabotaged him and put the washington superwonk Hillary in on the assumption the Press would never accept a guy like Bernie , ignoring the sizeable resentment amongst the public towards her (some of it, ridiculous admittedly but still it was there). So a pox on their houses.
However when it comes to state rights , the Democrats are at least honest. Both are authoritarian centeralizing powers , but the Dems don't pretend not to be about federal rule.
Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
If he had fessed up about drinking too much in his youth, he'd be fine. It is fibbing about it in official testimony that gets the security clearance guys nervous. You can have done a lot and still get cleared if you're honest about it and it wasn't very recent.
If the US can't regulate 'the internet' then on what basis can California?
Fact is, net neutrality isn't regulating 'the internet', it regulates ISPs that do business in the US... Your international argument is non-sensical, do you really believe the IS can't regulate within it's own borders how domestic ISP handle domestic traffic to domestic customers?
Ken
Not sure whats happening atm on legal weed, but a lot of the success came from the Obama Administration ordering the DEA to not to interfere with States that want to do their own thing.
No, no it did not. Obama's DEA made more busts of legal dispensaries, not less.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
This FALSE LOGIC gets pushed for any business large enough to exist outside a state. If you want to sell CARS in CA you follow their laws; it is not their problem if your business has troubles with that and bitches... unless the nation becomes too fascist and the bitching turns into bigger government...
Net Neutrality is all about THE LAST MILE. You can't get more local than that!
These are not interstate tariffs; this is a connection service; like the local power, phone, trash, or delivery companies!
Yes, ALL their propaganda applies to any multi-state business. They won't touch things they like; such as Texas lowering the quality of school textbooks nationwide...
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news