In a significant blow to net neutrality advocates, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) does not have the authority to impose net neutrality rules on internet service providers (ISPs). The three-judge panel's decision marks a major setback for the Biden administration's efforts to revive the rules, which were briefly reinstated after being repealed during the Trump administration.

The FCC had sought to reclassify ISPs as common carriers under Title II of the Communications Act, allowing it to impose policies preventing ISPs from discriminating against different internet traffic. However, the judges disagreed with the agency's interpretation, citing the recent downfall of Chevron deference, a legal doctrine that instructed courts to defer to regulatory agencies in many cases. The Supreme Court's decision to do away with Chevron deference in 2024 has given courts more freedom to favor their own interpretations over those of expert agencies.

The Sixth Circuit judges noted that the DC Circuit Court of Appeals had previously upheld net neutrality rules, but only because it relied on Chevron deference. Without Chevron, the judges felt free to interpret the statute more narrowly, ultimately concluding that the FCC does not have the authority to regulate ISPs as common carriers. The ruling is a significant victory for broadband industry associations, which had filed a suit against the FCC challenging the net neutrality rules.

The judges' decision was based on a detailed analysis of the Communications Act, with the court parsing the distinction between "information services" and more heavily regulated telecommunications services. The ruling includes philosophical discussions about the nature of information and how it is transmitted over the internet. For example, the judges noted that "the existence of a fact or a thought in one's mind is not 'information' like 0s and 1s used by computers," and that "speaking reduces a thought to sound, and writing reduces a thought to text."

The implications of the ruling are significant, as it leaves the future of net neutrality uncertain. FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel has called on lawmakers to take up the mantle of creating rules to safeguard the open internet, stating that "consumers across the country have told us again and again that they want an internet that is fast, open, and fair." However, with President-elect Donald Trump set to take office in mere weeks, it is unclear whether Congress will take action to revive net neutrality rules.

Republican Commissioner Brendan Carr, Trump's pick to lead the FCC, hailed the ruling as "a good win for the country," calling net neutrality rules an attempt by the Biden administration to "expand the government's control over every feature of the Internet ecosystem." Former FCC Chair Ajit Pai, who led the movement to repeal the rule during the first Trump administration, took a victory lap on social media, stating that "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.

The ruling has significant implications for the future of the internet, as it leaves ISPs free to regulate internet traffic as they see fit. Net neutrality advocates argue that this could lead to a tiered internet, where certain content is prioritized over others, while ISPs argue that they need the freedom to manage their networks to ensure quality of service. As the debate continues, one thing is clear: the future of the open internet hangs in the balance.