US Supreme Court ends fight over Obama-era net neutrality rules


Solicitor General Noel Francisco filed a letter and three petitions with the Court asking the justices to hear the case before three federal appellate courts issue rulings.

The California, New York and D.C. challenges were brought by DACA proponents seeking to block Trump's actions.

The legality of the program is not at issue in the case. On Monday, Francisco told the Court that expeditious review has not happened.

Opponents, though, say the internet thrived without a net neutrality policy for two decades.

The new rules, which gave internet service providers greater power to regulate the content that customers access, are now the subject of a separate legal fight after being challenged by numerous groups that backed net neutrality.

The appeals, filed more than a year ago, lost most of their practical significance in June, when a new Federal Communications Commission order took effect and abolished the net neutrality rule.

The World's Smelliest Fruit Grounded an Entire Plane in Indonesia
Zidane wrote that the passengers were allowed to leave the plane while the crew unloaded the sacks of durian from the plane. Some passengers even argued that apart from the unpleasant smell, they were also concerned by the extra weight on board.

Earlier this year, the Trump administration similarly attempted to jump the line and appeal to the Supreme Court after another lower court ordered that DACA resume.

The FCC itself also was in favor of voiding the decision that upheld its 2015-era rules, according to Jessica Rosenworcel, a Democrat on the commission.

The U.S. Supreme Court turned away a group of long-pending appeals from the broadband industry over the Obama-era "net neutrality" rule, which barred internet service providers from giving preferential treatment to some web traffic. The high court doesn't typically take cases before federal appeals courts rule on them.

Last month, frustrated by delays, the department filed notice that it would seek the high court's intervention if the 9th Circuit court did not rule by October 31. The change fits with the deregulatory stance of the Trump administration.

On the merits of the dispute, the Trump administration contends that its decision to terminate DACA can not be reviewed in court, since the program exists entirely at the executive branch's discretion. Then last September, he announced that DACA would end six months later unless Congress replaced Obama's executive action with legislation. It is rare the high court grants such a so-called fast-track petition before all the lower courts have weighed in on the merits. Those are the orders that the Administration has now asked the Justices to overturn.

In this October 9, 2018 photo, police office guards the main entrance to the Supreme Court in Washington. The cancellation is now being challenged in court. His work has appeared here since mid-2011.