Trump’s FCC Just Killed Net Neutrality, But Legal Challenges Are Already Coming

New York attorney general plans to sue the Trump administration.

FCC Chair Ajit PaiJacquelyn Martin/AP

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

The Federal Communications Commission voted 3-2 to repeal net neutrality Thursday, in a long-contested debate over whether internet service providers should treat all online content the same, or be allowed to give preference to certain websites or companies. 

The commission voted along party lines to repeal the Obama-era regulation, with three Republicans voting for repeal and two Democrats dissenting. “What is the FCC doing today? We are restoring the light-touch framework that has governed the internet for most of its existence,” said Ajit Pai, chair of the FCC. “The sky is not falling, consumers will remain protected and the internet will continue to thrive.”

Net neutrality, which the FCC implemented in 2015, was intended to keep the internet open and fair. The regulations barred internet service providers, or ISPs, from purposefully slowing down or increasing speeds for specific websites and prohibited ISPs from charging consumers for a “fast lane” to certain websites.

Supporters of net neutrality say that repealing the rule will lead to higher costs for consumers and give ISPs freedom to charge consumers more for accessing certain sites, or block consumers from accessing certain sites altogether. ISPs would also be able to charge companies more to ensure that their websites get the same speed as others—a move that would hurt smaller companies with fewer resources to compete with larger corporations. 

During the hearing, the Republican commissioners argued that repealing net neutrality would end an era of overregulation from the government, and that it would restore internet freedoms and increase innovation. “This will not break the internet,” said Commissioner Michael O’Rielly, who supported the repeal. 

Two commissioners strongly disagreed. “I dissent, because I am among the millions who is outraged,” Commissioner Mignon Clyburn said in a statement, arguing that the decision hurts businesses and consumers. The decision “puts the Federal Communications Commission on the wrong side of history,” said Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel, “the wrong side of the law, and the wrong side of the American public.” 

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has already announced he would sue the FCC over the decision, tweeting, “New Yorkers and all Americans deserve a free and open internet.”



Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend