Virginia’s Supreme Court has ruled in favor of Norfolk Southern in a fight over broadband companies’ ability to build across rail lines. The court found that a 2023 law allowing broadband companies to “take railroad property for nonpublic use” violates a provision in the state constitution and a separate state law addressing eminent domain. Cox Communications had attempted to use the law to cross NS property in eastern Virginia. The 2023 law caps the fees the railroad could charge broadband companies at $2,000 per crossing, plus a $5,000 reimbursement for railroad expenses, and designates the State Corporation Commission to address disputes. When NS attempted to charge Cox more than that, the cable company told the railroad it planned to go ahead without entering into an agreement. NS asked the commission for relief, but the commission rejected the railroad’s arguments without a hearing, saying NS had failed to establish an undue hardship. NS then appealed to the state Supreme Court.

This report examines the impact of broadband rate regulation on investment and competition. The study explores: 1) The state of the broadband market today 2) The nature of rate regulation and where it’s used and 3) The impact of  rate regulation on broadband. 

Plain old telephone service has been dying a slow death in the US since the turn of the century. For much of the 20^th century, almost every American household used only POTS to make a phone call. Now, only 1.3 percent of households rely on POTS to do so. What happened? Consumers flocked to mobile and Voice over Internet Protocol—advanced platforms that did not exist during the heyday of POTS’s monopoly reign. This is not news to the tens of millions of Americans who cut their telephone cords years ago and embraced mobile telephony or VoIP and all the advanced features they offer, like nationwide calling and the go-anywhere convenience of a cellphone. Unfortunately, for some state policymakers, the horse and buggy that is POTS continues to loom large, shaping their misinformed view of the advanced communications sector. Worryingly, some states have not only resisted removing outdated POTS laws from their books; they are actively seeking to extend those rules to new communications technologies, which have thrived in a competitive marketplace governed by a deregulatory framework. By doing so, states will undermine investment in new networks, increase prices, and ultimately harm consumers.

[Michael Santorelli is the Director of the Advanced Communications Law & Policy Institute at New York Law School]

The government giveth, and the government taketh away? That may be the case for the future of school-bus Wi-Fi, which is currently eligible for E-Rate discount under the Federal Communications Commission’s Universal Services Fund. Whether that will continue is now uncertain due to court cases challenging the validity of the USF funding model. In late March, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on an appeal of a 5th Circuit decision that the Universal Service Fund’s revenue mechanism represents an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority. The nation’s highest court is expected to rule soon on whether that decision should be upheld. If the circuit court ruling is upheld, it would be a blow not only to school bus-based Wi-Fi but also to other services supported by USF, especially E-Rate. The program provides discounts of 20 to 90 percent on the costs of internet connectivity for schools and libraries, low-income consumers, and those in rural areas needing online access to health care providers. 

Common Sense Media and Echelon Insights released the findings of a new poll showing that Americans across the political spectrum strongly oppose a decade-long ban on state AI safety laws included in the budget reconciliation bill narrowly passed by the House on May 22 and now being considered by the Senate. The key takeaways from the poll include:

• Concern about the potential effects of AI—especially on kids and teens—is widespread and bipartisan.
  • 93% of voters—including 95% of Republicans—are concerned about kids being exposed to highly sexualized AI-generated content online. Nine-in-ten worry about the effect of social media on kids and teens.
• Voters—including Republicans—do not want the budget reconciliation bill to pre-empt state efforts on AI.
  • 81% of voters overall agree that "advances in AI are exciting but also bring risks, and in such fast-moving times, we shouldn't force states to sit on the sidelines for a full decade." This includes 78% of Republicans.
• Voters may support innovation and technology, but they don't want it to come at the expense of kids' well-being.
  • 70% of voters overall—including 68% of Republicans—say that Congress should not prohibit states from enacting or enforcing AI and tech regulation because it could roll back protections for kids and teens from online dangers.