Court case

Judge Approves T-Mobile-Sprint Deal Affecting 100 Million Customers

Judge Victor Marrero of the United States District Court in Manhattan ruled in favor of T-Mobile’s takeover of Sprint in a deal that would further concentrate corporate ownership of technology, combining the nation’s third- and fourth-largest wireless carriers and creating a new telecommunications giant to take on AT&T and Verizon. The decision concluded an unusual suit filed in June by attorneys general from 13 states and the District of Columbia. The challenge was brought after regulators at the Department of Justice and Federal Communications Commission approved the deal.

T-Mobile/Sprint Inching Towards Final OK

On November 5, the Federal Communications Commission gave its final OK, approving—with conditions—the transfer of control applications filed by T-Mobile and Sprint. T-Mobile's acquisition of Sprint was first announced April 29, 2018, touting the capacity to rapidly create a nationwide 5G network while offering lower prices, better quality, unmatched value, and greater competition. Is that where we've ended up? Although T-Mobile's acquisition of Sprint has gotten approval from both the U.S. Department of Justice and the FCC, the deal isn't done yet.

US Court of Appeals Issues Net Neutrality Decision

We uphold the 2018 Order, with two exceptions. First, the Court concludes that the Federal Communications Commission has not shown legal authority to issue its Preemption Directive, which would have barred states from imposing any rule or requirement that the FCC “repealed or decided to refrain from imposing” in the Order or that is “more stringent” than the Order. 2018 Order ¶ 195. The Court accordingly vacates that portion of the Order.

FCC struggles to convince judge that broadband isn’t “telecommunications”

Federal Communications Commission General Counsel Thomas Johnson faced a skeptical panel of judges of the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit as he defended the agency's repeal of net neutrality rules and deregulation of the broadband industry.

FCC Seeks Postponement of Net Neutrality Oral Argument

With the US.Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit signaling it planned to hold the Feb. 1 oral argument in Mozilla vs.

The FCC's Classification of Mobile Broadband Ignores Technology, History, and Common Sense

The Federal Communications Commission’s 2018 Restoring Internet Freedom (RIF) Order reclassified mobile broadband Internet access service from a commercial mobile service to a private mobile service, largely by ignoring the integration of the Internet with the telephone network.  This reclassification gave the FCC the license to repeal the 2015 net neutrality rules for mobile broadband service. How did this FCC get to the conclusion that the most important public mobile service of our time is a private mobile service?

Reactions to Supreme Court Rejecting Industry Challenge of 2015 Net Neutrality Rules

The US Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge to the DC Circuit's 2016 decision upholding the Federal Communications Commission’s network neutrality rules. The Supreme Court also declined to vacate the DC Circuit's decision as moot. 

Supreme Court rejects industry challenge of 2015 net neutrality rules

The US Supreme Court has declined to hear the broadband industry's challenge of the Federal Communications Commission's 2015 order to impose net neutrality rules and strictly regulate broadband.

Reactions to California Net Neutrality Law

After Gov Jerry Brown (D-CA) signed California's net neutrality legislation into law AND the US Justice Department filed a lawsuit against the state of California, a number of policymakers and advocates responded:

Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA): “The enactment of California’s net neutrality law is a huge victory for the free and open internet. California has shown Washington and the rest of the country that the internet warriors fighting to save net neutrality will not be stopped."

AT&T’s Time Warner Takeover Wins Judge’s Approval in Defeat for Justice Dept

A federal judge approved the blockbuster merger between AT&T and Time Warner, rebuffing the government’s effort to block the $85.4 billion deal, in a decision that is expected to unleash a wave of takeovers in corporate America. Judge Richard J. Leon of the United States District Court in Washington said the Justice Department had not proved that the telecommunication company’s acquisition of Time Warner would lead to fewer choices for consumers and higher prices for television and internet services. 

FTC’s Data-Speed Lawsuit Against AT&T Can Proceed, Appeals Court Says

A federal appeals court ruled the Federal Trade Commission can move forward with its lawsuit alleging AT&T misled wireless subscribers by reducing data speeds for several million customers who thought they had purchased unlimited plans. The ruling by the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals is a notable win for the FTC because it restores the agency’s regulatory authority over large internet service providers.

13 Russians Indicted by Special Counsel in First Charges on 2016 Election Interference

The special counsel investigating Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election charged 13 Russian nationals and three Russian organizations owith illegally using social media platforms to sow political discord, including actions that supported the presidential candidacy of Donald Trump and disparaged his opponent, Hillary Clinton. In a 37-page indictment filed in United States District Court, Mueller said that the 13 individuals have conspired since 2014 to violate laws that prohibit foreigners from spending money to inf

Supreme Court Wary of States’ Bid to Limit Federal Contact With Social Media Companies

A majority of the Supreme Court seemed wary on March 18 of a bid by two Republican-led states to limit the Biden Administration’s interactions with social media companies, with several justices questioning the states’ legal theories and factual assertions. Most of the justices appeared convinced that government officials should be able to try to persuade private companies, whether news organizations or tech platforms, not to publish information so long as the requests are not backed by coercive threats.

Public officials can be held liable for blocking critics on social media

The Supreme Court ruled that public officials who post about topics relating to their work on their personal social media accounts are acting on behalf of the government, and therefore can be held liable for violating the First Amendment when they block their critics, only when they have the power to speak on behalf of the state and are actually exercising that power. The court’s decisions came in a pair of cases, involving local officials in California and Michigan who blocked constituents who made repetitive and critical comments on their personal social media accounts.

Keyword search warrants and the Fourth Amendment

Does a search warrant ordering Google to give law enforcement information regarding internet searches containing specific keywords made during a particular window of time violate the Fourth Amendment? This question was before the Colorado Supreme Court in 2023 and is now before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures by the government.

The Supreme Court is about to decide the future of online speech

Social media companies have long made their own rules about the content they allow on their sites. But a pair of cases set to be argued before the Supreme Court on Monday will test the limits of that freedom, examining whether they can be legally required to host users’ speech. The cases, Moody v. NetChoice and NetChoice v. Paxton, deal with the constitutionality of laws created in Florida and Texas, respectively.

LTD Broadband Challenges FCC Denial of RDOF Funds in Court

LTD Broadband has filed a petition for review of the Federal Communications Commission’s decision to deny it funding as part of the Rural Digital Opportunity Fund. LTD, which largely offers fixed wireless broadband, filed a request for judicial review with the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on February 2, contesting the agency decision on December 4, 2023. The action follows a series of events stemming from the FCC's proposal for a $21.7-million fine against LTD for defaulting on its bids in the RDOF broadband subsidy program.

Court Tosses $1 Billion Verdict Against Cox Communications for Music Piracy

A federal appeals court tossed a $1 billion verdict won by music publishers against Cox Communications, ordering a new trial on how much the internet provider should owe in damages for illegal downloads by its customers. The case stems from a 2018 copyright-infringement lawsuit filed by leading record companies and music publishers, including Sony, Universal Music and Warner Music.

Judge rules against users suing Google and Apple over “annoying” search results

While the world awaits closing arguments later this year in the US government's antitrust case over Google's search dominance, a California judge has dismissed a lawsuit from 26 Google users who claimed that Google's default search agreement with Apple violates antitrust law and has ruined everyone's search results. Users had argued that Google struck a deal making its search engine the default on Apple's Safari web browser specifically to keep Apple from competi

Yet Another Challenge to Federal Communications Commission Authority

Federal courts are full of cases that are challenging the authority of federal regulatory agencies, including the case of Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy, which is pending before the Supreme Court as of January 2024. Hedge fund manager George Jarkesy was accused of committing fraud by misrepresenting himself to investors. The case was heard by an administrative law judge at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), who imposed a fine and penalties, and ordered Jarkesy to disgorge $685,000 in unlawful profits.

California Aims $2 Billion at Students Hurt by Remote Learning to Settle Lawsuit

In the fall of 2020, around the height of the debate over pandemic school closures, a lawsuit in California made a serious claim: The state had failed its constitutional obligation to provide an equal education to lower-income, Black and Hispanic students, who had less access to online learning. State officials distributed more than 45,000 laptops and more than 73,000 other computing devices to students, according to court documents in the case.

Benton Institute for Broadband & Society Files Petition for Review

"We are extremely pleased that the FCC has adopted new and powerful rules prohibiting digital discrimination.  We have nonetheless challenged two small, but important provisions of the rules today in the U.S.

Chamber of Commerce sues Federal Communications Commission Over Broadband Rule

The Chamber of Commerce, the Texas Association of Business, and the Longview Chamber of Commerce filed a lawsuit against the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit over the Commission’s recent rulemaking that gives itself sweeping authority over the broadband marketplace.

Republican Attorneys General back Texas and Florida social media regulations at US Supreme Court

Social media companies should be treated as utilities such as telephone or telegraph companies, a group of states led by Republican attorneys general told the US Supreme Court. In a friend-of-the-court brief, 19 states and the state legislature of Arizona wrote that the Supreme Court should uphold laws passed by Texas and Florida that restrict companies including Meta, YouTube, X and others fro