2nd Set of Petitioners Seeks to Intervene in Support of FCC Discrimination Order
The Media Alliance and Great Public Schools Now seek to intervene in support of the FCC in eight petitions for review of the commission’s Nov. 20 digital discrimination order, now consolidated in the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, said the nonprofits’ unopposed motion Tuesday.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
The nonprofits don’t seek to intervene in the petition of the Benton Institute for Broadband & Society (docket 24-1317), which filed a similar motion to intervene earlier Tuesday (see 2402200034).
The two groups' petition for review, like that of the Benton Institute, faults the FCC’s “neglect to sufficiently consider and adopt a formal complaint process for digital discrimination complaints,” said their motion. But they argue that the overall rule is necessary “to facilitate the equitable access to broadband services,” it said.
Lower-income communities in Los Angeles County “must pay more money under worse terms to have the same service as their wealthier neighbors,” said their motion. “Because of the monopoly status of one internet service provider in Los Angeles County, those living in lower income communities there have no choice in provider, which, without a rule providing for equitable access to broadband," don't have a "means to escape higher prices and worse contracts, except to not participate,” it said.
If the various petitioners are successful in their efforts to have the Nov. 20 rule set aside, the communities for which the Media Alliance and Great Public Schools Now advocate, including disproportionately low-income communities and communities of color, “will be left with inferior options with limited speeds and increasing prices,” said the motion. Such a result would harm their interests “in advancing equitable broadband access for their members and constituents, who, because of their race, ethnicity, color, income level, religion, or national origin, lack access to quality, affordable broadband,” it said.
If the order is set aside, the Media Alliance and Great Public Schools Now will be forced “to expend resources in finding and advocating for adoption of other legal and policy mechanisms to ensure equitable access to broadband for the communities they serve,” said their motion. Resources would need to be dedicated “to advocacy efforts for new rules or laws at the local, state, and federal levels to replace the FCC rules, and to research and education to advance those efforts,” it said.
The FCC can’t “adequately represent” the interests of the Media Alliance and Great Public Schools Now, said the motion. They have “distinct interests” from the FCC that aren’t “subsumed by the general public interest,” it said. The commission’s interest “is to satisfy its obligation” under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act “to adopt final rules to facilitate equal access to broadband while taking into account the issues of technical and economic feasibility presented by that objective,” it said.
The FCC by its nature as the government agency charged with that responsibility “must weigh together the interests of industry and the proponents of equitable broadband access,” said the motion. Its interest in a “middle road” is exemplified by the order’s adoption of rules that prohibit digital discrimination “but restrict avenues to raise complaints of such discrimination,” it said. The Media Alliance and Great Public Schools Now will show, through their petition for review, that the decision “fails to pass muster under the Administrative Procedure Act,” said the motion.