Yesterday, Senator Al Franken jumped into the net neutrality debate by questioning Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor about her position regarding net neutrality. Sotomayor did not take a position one way or the other, stating that the role of the Court is to interpret law rather than make law. “The role of the court is never to make the policy, it’s to wait until Congress acts,” she said.
The U. S. Supreme Court ruled, in 2005, that the FCC has authority to decide how to regulate Internet services. It was a in a 6-3 decision. The case reversed a 2002 FCC decision that determined that cable companies weren’t required to share their lines with other companies, which utilities have interpreted as meaning that cable and phone companies may exercise wide latitude in deciding if and when they will deliver Internet traffic, according to net neutrality advocates such as SavetheInternet.com.
SavetheInternet.com, a public interest group, describes itself as “a [c]oalition of everyday people who have banded together with thousands of nonprofit organizations, businesses and bloggers to protect Internet freedom.” In a recent post on its blog, SavetheInternet.com writer Marvin Ammouri outlines why the Supreme Court is important to the net neutrality cause. “There are two main legal issues:,” he says. “(1) Can Congress adopt a network neutrality law without the Supreme Court overturning it; and (2) Can the Federal Communications Commission adopt a network neutrality rule without a specific law passed by Congress first?”
SavetheInternet.com and other public interest groups have rallied to press Congress to pass explicit rules requiring net neutrality and to make clear that the FCC has authority to prevent Internet providers from blocking or delaying some Internet traffic.
Telecommunications providers such as Comcast maintain that the FCC doesn’t have explicit authority to enforce net-neutrality rules.
