The Resurfacing and Retreat of Net Neutrality

The struggle over net neutrality appears to be endless, neither completely won nor entirely lost.

For a decade and a half, federal regulations related to net neutrality have been inconsistent. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) introduced the Open Internet Order during Barack Obama's presidency in 2010, which stopped internet service providers (ISPs) from blocking or slowing down access to lawful online content.

However, these regulations faced legal challenges, initiated by ISPs, which led to their suspension. An amendment to this framework was approved in 2015, but the regulations were reversed in 2017 under President Donald Trump. By 2024, there was anticipation of these rules making a resurgence, but that optimism was short-lived as a court quickly issued a new ruling against them.

The Shifting Landscape of Internet Regulations

Under the Trump administration, the FCC chose not to contest the judicial decisions against net neutrality. Chairman Brendan Carr embarked on a deregulation mission, aiming to eliminate what were deemed 'redundant' constraints.

The Debate over Regulatory Burdens

ISPs have long criticized net neutrality rules as overly burdensome. For example, USTelecom's president Jonathan Spalter regarded the potential reinstatement of these rules in 2024 as counterproductive and an unnecessary distraction.

Matt Wood from a nonprofit organization argues that these rules have minimal financial impact on ISPs. He states that service providers generally operate in line with these regulations regardless, and most of their objections are based more on ideology than practical concerns.

State-Level Interventions and Challenges

As federal oversight diminishes, state governments have been proactive in enforcing net neutrality. California's 2018 legislation, seen as the benchmark, introduced measures surpassing the federal standards of 2015, notably banning zero-rating.

States like Washington, Oregon, Colorado, New Jersey, and Vermont have instituted similar rules. This state-level activism is crucial as ISPs have so far been hesitant to introduce fast lanes or prioritize paid internet traffic, thanks largely to these protections.

However, the federal NTIA has made moves to incentivize the removal of these state laws by tying them to broadband funding through the Biden administration’s Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) initiative.

Broader Concerns and Future Implications

Critics, like Matt Wood, caution against accusations of 'rate regulation' tied to state net neutrality laws, arguing that they are often overstated and don't directly affect broadband pricing.

FCC's broader agenda reflects a deregulatory trend not just limited to net neutrality but extending into various technology sectors, creating a contentious political battleground.

The ongoing battle over the control and regulation of internet service provision continues to have significant implications for the expansion of broadband access, particularly in rural regions where options are often limited.

As debates around funding and regulation persist, the state of internet access and net neutrality hangs in the balance entering 2026.