Recent Court Ruling Signals Power of Federal Regulators is Weakening

A recent decision in Ohio has halted the FCC’s “net neutrality” rules, raising questions about the limits of federal agencies’ authority.

Key Facts:

• An Ohio appeals court struck down the FCC’s net neutrality rules earlier this month, citing the Supreme Court’s 2024 Loper Bright decision.
• The ruling stated that the FCC no longer had the authority to prohibit broadband providers from slowing or blocking web traffic.
• The court in Cincinnati argued that agencies can no longer be given broad leeway to interpret unclear laws.
• Tech giants previously supported these rules, while telecom companies opposed them.
• President Trump repealed net neutrality rules, and President Biden later reinstated them in 2024.

The Rest of The Story:

This most recent ruling revolves around a long-running debate about how much power federal agencies should have.

Net neutrality rules were introduced during the Obama administration to prevent internet service providers from blocking or slowing down web content.

Their repeal under Trump spurred legal battles across different jurisdictions.

Then, under Biden, the rules returned, prompting fresh court challenges.

The Ohio appeals court based its decision on the Supreme Court’s Loper Bright ruling, which ended the decades-old practice of courts deferring to agency interpretations when laws were vague.

By no longer granting wide authority to the FCC, the Ohio court opened the door for more scrutiny of agency actions.

According to legal experts like Randolph May, this change is reshaping the way regulators operate, allowing judges to play a bigger role in deciding what agencies can and cannot do.

Susan Dudley, a professor at George Washington University, says this is a major shift from past rulings that upheld what she calls “flip flopping” based on changing political leadership.

Now, federal agencies face a different landscape where courts demand clear legislative backing, especially on issues that have broad economic or political impact.

Some businesses, meanwhile, are seizing this opportunity to challenge other federal rules, believing that Loper Bright makes these regulations more vulnerable in court.

Commentary:

Some observers see the Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision as a much-needed course correction.

Limiting agency powers can restore a stronger system of checks and balances and prevent bureaucratic overreach.

With courts no longer obligated to defer automatically to agencies, we expect more attempts to curtail regulatory authority in the months and years ahead.

This new legal standard could pave the way for a healthier separation of powers, ensuring that major policy changes require explicit action from Congress rather than shifting executive mandates.

The Bottom Line:

The Ohio appeals court’s rejection of the FCC’s net neutrality rules illustrates the growing impact of the Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision.

This outcome shows that courts will now insist on a solid legal foundation before allowing agencies to act.

READ NEXT: Company Monitoring LA Power Grid Releases Stunning Data Showing What Happened Just Before the Fires Started

As a result, both regulators and companies across the nation will likely face closer scrutiny of their actions.