The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals delivered a significant blow to the Biden administration’s attempt to reimpose net neutrality rules, effectively ending what many conservatives have long seen as a federal overreach into the internet marketplace.
In a unanimous decision authored by Circuit Judge Richard Griffin, the court ruled that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) lacks the legal authority to regulate internet broadband companies under the “telecommunications service” provision of the Communications Act. Translation? The FCC can’t just make up authority it doesn’t have.
Net neutrality has always been more about expanding the FCC’s power than addressing any real, widespread consumer issue. Originally pitched as a safeguard against internet service providers (ISPs) discriminating against certain content or services, the policy became a rallying cry for progressives and Big Tech allies like Google, Facebook, and Netflix. These corporations, while claiming to champion a “fair and open” internet, were also very interested in rules that would prevent ISPs from charging them extra for their massive bandwidth usage. Convenient, isn’t it?
The Obama administration latched onto net neutrality in 2015, framing it as a necessary protection against hypothetical threats of ISPs throttling content or creating so-called “fast lanes” for certain companies. But critics argued that this was a solution in search of a problem, one that allowed the FCC to stretch its regulatory authority into uncharted territory. The fact that it mobilized younger, tech-savvy voters didn’t hurt either.
Enter Ajit Pai, Trump’s FCC chairman, who famously rolled back the Obama-era net neutrality rules in 2018. Predictably, the left sounded the alarm, warning of apocalyptic consequences: innovation would die, free speech would vanish, and ISPs would run amok, throttling every website they didn’t like. None of that happened. The internet continued to function, Netflix kept streaming, and the doomsday predictions were exposed as little more than fear-mongering.
For a decade, I’ve argued that so-called “net neutrality” regulations are unlawful (not to mention pointless). Today, the Sixth Circuit held exactly that. You can read the court’s excellent opinion here: https://t.co/3za2KOk7ou
It’s time for regulators and activists to give up… https://t.co/HzEnKUDpal pic.twitter.com/QbFgLEViUQ
— Ajit Pai (@AjitPai) January 2, 2025
Fast forward to 2024, when Biden’s FCC attempted to bring back net neutrality. Once again, the policy was challenged in court, and the Sixth Circuit’s ruling now firmly establishes that the FCC cannot classify broadband internet as a “telecommunications service” to impose these rules. In a nod to Justice Gorsuch’s critique of regulatory vacillations in Loper Bright, Judge Griffin pointed out the whiplash-inducing cycle of net neutrality policies: Obama’s rules, repealed by Trump, reimposed by Biden, and now struck down again. Enough is enough.
After almost 2 decades, the fight for broadband internet to be treated as an essential service like water or electricity has come to an end. Legal Fellow at the Cato Institute, @bskorup, explains what happens when the net neutrality rules are lifted. pic.twitter.com/BF6v3JnWoM
— EWTN News Nightly (@EWTNNewsNightly) January 4, 2025
The decision is a victory for those who believe in a free-market approach to the Internet. Without FCC interference, ISPs have greater flexibility to innovate and adapt to consumer demands. If the unlikely boogeyman of discriminatory practices or unfair throttling ever does materialize, Congress—not unelected bureaucrats—has the power to grant the FCC the necessary authority. Until then, it’s time for the FCC to stay in its lane and let the internet thrive without unnecessary meddling.
For conservatives, this decision reinforces a core principle: less government interference leads to more freedom, more innovation, and better outcomes. Net neutrality was always a Trojan horse for federal control, and now it’s back where it belongs—on the cutting room floor.
