Enlarge (credit: Getty Images | Matt Anderson Photography)
ISPs Challenge New York’s Affordable Broadband Initiative in Supreme Court
A coalition of Internet Service Providers (ISPs) has appealed to the US Supreme Court to invalidate a New York statute mandating that broadband companies provide low-income residents with access to internet service for $15 per month. On Monday, six industry trade associations representing various sectors—including cable, telecommunications, mobile, and satellite—filed a formal petition contesting this state law.
The Implications of This Legal Challenge
This recent move by ISPs follows their previous success in overturning certain net neutrality regulations imposed by the FCC. The current petition underscores these companies’ growing concerns regarding potential state-level interventions targeting broadband pricing and operations in response to federal regulatory gaps. Should they lose this battle against state authority, it may pave the way for other states like New York to adopt similar regulatory measures governing broadband services.
A Call for Inaction on State Regulations
ISPs urge that if the New York law is maintained concurrently while federal regulations are rescinded, “it will probably result in an increase in rate regulation unless the Court intervenes.” They contend that once enforcement begins on New York’s Affordable Broadband Act (ABA), other states might replicate such legislation as consumers purchase internet services at rates significantly below market value.
The Financial Setbacks for ISP Investment
According to representatives from major ISPs, adhering to New York’s price cap structures would compel them into offering internet services at unprofitable prices—ultimately hindering investments aimed at enhancing or expanding broadband access across underserved communities. They caution that as more rate restrictions emerge across various regions, significant repercussions will follow—potentially limiting critical financial resources needed for extending broadband coverage where it is desperately required.
Read 13 remaining paragraphs | Comments
