Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Explainer: What You Should Know About the Net Neutrality Ruling
Explainer: What You Should Know About the Net Neutrality Ruling
Jan 13, 2026 6:39 PM

What just happened?

On MondaytheD.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), sayingthe agency had the legal authority to enact their Open Internet Order (i.e.,net neutrality rules.)

What was this case about?

Last Spring theCTIA, the trade group that represents the munication sectors, filed a lawsuit with the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals challenging the FCC’s decision to “impose sweeping new net neutrality rules and reclassifying mobile broadband as mon carrier utility.” The CTIA had argued that thethe FCC had “opted to resuscitate mand-and-control regulatory regime, including a process where innovators must first seek permission from the FCC before rolling out new services.” In so doing, they claim, the FCC “usurped the role of Congress and departed from a bipartisan mobile-specific framework to create a new intrusive regulatory framework.”

What is net neutrality?

Net neutrality (short for “network neutrality”) refers to both a design principle and laws that attempt to regulate and enforce that principle. The net neutrality principle is the idea that a public information network should aspire to treat all content, sites, and platforms equally. At its simplest, network neutrality is the idea that all internet traffic should be treated equally and that every website — from to Acton.org — should be treated the same when es to giving users the bandwidth to reach the internet-connected services they prefer.

Net neutrality laws are legislation or regulation that prevents Internet service providers (ISPs) from discriminating or charging different prices based on such criteria as user, content, site, platform, application, or type of attached equipment.

What is the basic argument in favor of net neutrality regulation?

Proponents of net neutrality regulation fear that without regulation ISPs will abuse their power. For example, an ISP like Comcast could charge users more to access services of petitors. Since Comcast has it’s own video-on-demand service, they could charge an additional access fee for users who want to use Netflix and stream videos over their Internet connection.

Another argument is that ISPs could stifle innovation by forcing its customers to use preferred services that have a contract with the ISP. panies, for instance, would be able to pay higher fees to the ISPs, while new, smaller start-ups may not have the resources to pay for access to the ISPs customers.

What is the basic argument against net neutrality regulation?

Critics of net neutrality regulation argue that ISPs have a right to distribute their network differently among services, and that this is necessary for innovation. For instance, in the example of Comcast and Netflix, they point out that if Netflix is hogging up bandwidth, pany should be charged more for the necessary updates that Comcast’s systems will require.

Free market advocates also say that government regulation petition and innovation and that the market will provide the best solution. For instance, as applied to the previous example, Comcast customers who are upset about having to pay more for Netflix could switch to another ISP, such as AT&T.

What changes were made by court rulings?

The FCC had previously claimed that ISPs were mon carriers.” This meant they had to abide by the same rules as panies and not give special preference to one type of call (or traffic) over another. In 2014 a federalappeals court ruled that the FCC’s net neutrality rules wereinvalid. The court ruled that while the FCC has authority to regulate how Internet traffic is managed, it couldn’t impose rules on ISPs based on how they classify the content.

What are the FCC’s net neutrality rules?

In their Open Internet order, the FCC included three “bright line” rules:

No Blocking: broadband providers may not block access to legal content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices.No Throttling: broadband providers may not impair or degrade lawful Internet traffic on the basis of content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices.No Paid Prioritization: broadband providers may not favor some lawful Internet traffic over other lawful traffic in exchange for consideration of any kind—in other words, no “fast lanes.” This rule also bans ISPs from prioritizing content and services of their affiliates.

Why should Christians care about net neutrality laws?

Christians are divided on the issue of net neutrality regulation. Although some advocacy groups, such as the Christian Coalition, favor net neutrality laws, many others (such as American Values and CatholicVote.org), oppose the regulations.

Christian supporters fear that without the regulation political organizing and religious advocacy could be slowed by the handful of dominant Internet providers who ask advocacy groups or candidates to pay a fee to join the “fast lane.”

Christian opponents claim that the regulations will only stop future innovation, including the types of filters and blocks that parents can use to prevent children from viewing pornography. The groups hope that Internet providers will continue to be allowed to block content from some sites, which could be barred under net neutrality proposals.

Yet other opponents worry that rather than creating a neutral platform for all viewpoints, net neutrality regulation would empower ISPs to censor out viewpoints they don’t like as long it’ fits the FCC’s criteria of ‘reasonable network management.’

What happens now?

As expected the panies have said they’ll appeal this verdict, leaving theSupreme Court to decide theultimate fate of net neutrality.

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
For America’s Elites, Religious Freedom is a Non-Issue
America’s Founding Fathers considered religious liberty to be our “first freedom.” But as Ken Blackwell notes, that view is no longer shared by our media and foreign policy elites: All such understandings of the religious freedom foundation of American civil liberty and foreign policy seem long forgotten by the elites of today. The media cares little about religious freedom. The famous Rothman-Lichter study of 1981 surveyed 240 journalists from the prestige press. Of course, 80 percent of them voted one...
Dispersing Poor People And Crime
Emily Badger at The Atlantic Wire posts mon sense story regarding the debate about whether or not the dispersing of poor people out of inner-city housing projects into suburban neighborhoods, through government housing voucher programs, increases crime rates. The article reflects recent research by Michael Lens, an assistant professor of urban planning at UCLA. A growing stack of research now supports [the] hypothesis that housing vouchers do not in fact lead to crime. Lens has just added another study to...
Lord Acton and America’s Moral Absolutes Concerning Liberty
Lord Acton once said of the American revolution: “No people was so free as the insurgents, no government less oppressive than the government which they overthrew.” It was America’s high view of liberty and its ideas that cultivated this unprecedented freedom ripe for flourishing. Colonists railed over 1 and 2 percent tax rates and were willing to take up arms in a protracted and bloody conflict to secure independence and self-government. In a chapter on Lord Acton in The Moral...
The New Front in the Struggle for Religious Liberty
There’s a new front in the struggle for religious liberty, says Brian Simboli: Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. FOIA’s implementation is broken, and defenders of religious liberty ought to seek ways to fix it. . . . t would be extraordinarily naïve to assume that threats to religious liberty are going to diminish ing decades. Religious institutions will have to seek ways to check government power and seek bureaucratic accountability. Improving our FOIA system now will prove a boon...
Spirit-and-Body Economics
Over at the Kern Pastors Network, Greg Forster points to Rev. Robert Sirico’s speech from this year’s Acton University, drawing particularly on Sirico’s emphasis on Christian anthropology.“One may not say that we are spirits inside of flesh,” Sirico said, “but that we are spirits and flesh.” Forster summarizes: Christianity teaches that the human person is, in Sirico’s words, both corporeal and transcendent. We cannot make sense of ourselves if we are only bodies. How could a strictly material body think...
Disability and Discipleship: God Don’t Make No Junk
In this week’s Acton Commentary, “Disability, Service, and Stewardship,” I write, “Our service of others may or may not be recognized by the marketplace as something valuable or worth paying for. But each one of us has something to offer someone else. All of us have ministries of one kind or another. Our very existence itself must be seen as a blessing from God.” During a sermon a couple weeks ago at my church, the preacher made an important point...
Bradley Cited in News Roundup on Millenials Leaving Church
Last week, Rachel Held Evans wrote an article discussing millennials leaving the church. This piece quickly went viral prompting responses from mentators, debating “why those belonging to the millennial generation are leaving the church and what should be done about it.” Research fellow at Acton, Anthony Bradley, discusses Evans’ piece in “United Methodists Wearing A Millennial Evangelical Face.” Jeff Schapiro, at the Christian Post, discusses this debate and summarizes mentators’ opinions, including Bradley’s: Anthony Bradley, associate professor of Theology and...
What Distributists Get Wrong
Last week, we took a look at what distributists get right in terms of economics, through the eyes of David Deavel at Intercollegiate Review. Now, Deavel discusses where distributism goes off the rails in that same series. It is a rather long list, but here are the highlights. First, Deavel says that simple economics escapes distributists. Despite the fact that economics teaches that actions in the real world have real world consequences, distributists tend to ignore this fact. They scoff...
Review & Audio: Evaluating the Fair Trade Movement
Samuel Kampa recently reviewed Victor Claar’s monograph, Fair Trade? Its Prospects as a Poverty Solution. Kampa begins menting on how quickly the “fair trade” moment has gained popularity, especially among the college and post-college aged, but also in the munity. He says that young people “are doing one thing right: expressing sincere concern about world poverty. If this concern can be channeled into effective action, great things can happen. Of course, effective is the key word.” First, he offers a...
How Can We Unite Universal Coverage and Personal Choice in Health Care?
Our health care system is broken. So why can’t we agree on how to fix it? The main problem is that disagreements about health care reform tend to be caused by a difference in values. Conservatives value personal choice and efficiency while progressives value coverage and affordability, says AEI’s Henry Olsen. But what if we could reform the healthcare system so that it recognized all these values? What if we could design a health care system from scratch, what would...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved