759

The downfall of Chevron deference could completely change the ways courts review net neutrality, according to Bloomberg Intelligence’s Matt Schettenhelm. “The FCC’s 2024 effort to reinstitute federal broadband regulation is the latest chapter in a long-running regulatory saga, yet we think the demise of deference will change its course in a fundamental way,” he wrote in a recent report. “This time, we don’t expect the FCC to prevail in court as it did in 2016.” Schettenhelm estimated an 80 percent chance of the FCC’s newest net neutrality order being blocked or overturned in the absence of Chevron deference.

Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan has made no secret of her ambitions to use the agency’s authority to take bold action to restore competition to digital markets and protect consumers. But with Chevron being overturned amid a broader movement undermining agency authority without clear direction from Congress, Schettenhelm said, “it’s about the worst possible time for the FTC to be claiming novel rulemaking power to address unfair competition issues in a way that it never has before.”

Khan’s methods have drawn intense criticism from the business community, most recently with the agency’s labor-friendly rulemaking banning noncompete agreements in employment contracts. That action relies on the FTC’s interpretation of its authority to allow it to take action in this area — the kind of thing that brings up questions about agency deference.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] EatATaco@lemm.ee 20 points 4 months ago

But both sides are the same.

God damn it, i wish Clinton had won so bad. It would be the exact opposite and corporations wouldn't be getting this free reign. Fuck.

[-] FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world 59 points 4 months ago

I wish Gore had won, every other headline wouldn’t be about the impending climate doom and what we’re not doing to stop it

Oh wait, he DID win and the fucking court stole it

[-] marx2k@lemmy.world 12 points 4 months ago

Don't forget that 3 of the current justices (Barrett, roberts, kavanaugh) were on bush's legal team in 2000 Bush vs Gore

[-] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

FL would've been a landslide and the courts wouldn't have even been asked if the greens voted for Gore.

[-] pulaskiwasright@lemmy.ml 16 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I wish the democrats didn’t force her, the candidate that was predicted to be weakest against Trump and the only one likely to lose, through the primary with every trick they could. The democrats tried to skew and steer their own voters and we all lost because of it.

[-] njm1314@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

The only one likely to lose? I think you have your facts confused on that one.

[-] pulaskiwasright@lemmy.ml 3 points 4 months ago

I don’t. She was predicted to be the weakest against Trump during the primaries.

[-] njm1314@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

You're going to have to prove that. I want to see numbers.

[-] spacesatan@lemm.ee 0 points 4 months ago
[-] njm1314@lemmy.world -1 points 4 months ago

Yes that's nice, it was not the assertion though so I don't know why you're supplying it.

[-] spacesatan@lemm.ee 0 points 4 months ago

What exactly is the distinction between "weakest against Trump" and "had worse polling margins against Trump?" If you specifically want to dial in on the 'likely to lose' claim that isn't what you were asking for in the comment I replied to.

[-] FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today 7 points 4 months ago

TBH with how Obama treated Netanyahu versus Trump admin backing single state solution: I bet the war on the Gaza Strip wouldn't be happening, either. Not at the same scale, at least.

[-] retrospectology@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago

Clinton is super pro-corporate, what are you on about? She was unelectable and never should've run, she's directly responsible for Trump.

[-] EatATaco@lemm.ee 5 points 4 months ago

You think she would have nominated people like kagan or people like gorsuch? Did you see how these votes went down partisan lines? I see for your other responses to me that reality ain't necessarily your thing, but just try to think about this rationally for a second.

That being said, if sanders had won the wh, his choices would have likely been even better.

[-] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

God damn it, i wish Clinton had won so bad. It would be the exact opposite and corporations wouldn’t be getting this free reign. Fuck. \s

FTFY.

[-] EatATaco@lemm.ee 6 points 4 months ago

Literally all of these have been a long ideological lines. Do you really think she would have appointed conservatives? Are "muh both sides"ers really this out of touch with reality?

this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2024
759 points (99.1% liked)

Technology

59169 readers
2917 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS