The downfall of Chevron deference could completely change the ways courts review net neutrality, according to Bloomberg Intelligence’s Matt Schettenhelm. “The FCC’s 2024 effort to reinstitute federal broadband regulation is the latest chapter in a long-running regulatory saga, yet we think the demise of deference will change its course in a fundamental way,” he wrote in a recent report. “This time, we don’t expect the FCC to prevail in court as it did in 2016.” Schettenhelm estimated an 80 percent chance of the FCC’s newest net neutrality order being blocked or overturned in the absence of Chevron deference.

Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan has made no secret of her ambitions to use the agency’s authority to take bold action to restore competition to digital markets and protect consumers. But with Chevron being overturned amid a broader movement undermining agency authority without clear direction from Congress, Schettenhelm said, “it’s about the worst possible time for the FTC to be claiming novel rulemaking power to address unfair competition issues in a way that it never has before.”

Khan’s methods have drawn intense criticism from the business community, most recently with the agency’s labor-friendly rulemaking banning noncompete agreements in employment contracts. That action relies on the FTC’s interpretation of its authority to allow it to take action in this area — the kind of thing that brings up questions about agency deference.

  • EatATaco@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    But both sides are the same.

    God damn it, i wish Clinton had won so bad. It would be the exact opposite and corporations wouldn’t be getting this free reign. Fuck.

    • FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      I wish Gore had won, every other headline wouldn’t be about the impending climate doom and what we’re not doing to stop it

      Oh wait, he DID win and the fucking court stole it

      • marx2k@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Don’t forget that 3 of the current justices (Barrett, roberts, kavanaugh) were on bush’s legal team in 2000 Bush vs Gore

    • retrospectology@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      Clinton is super pro-corporate, what are you on about? She was unelectable and never should’ve run, she’s directly responsible for Trump.

    • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      TBH with how Obama treated Netanyahu versus Trump admin backing single state solution: I bet the war on the Gaza Strip wouldn’t be happening, either. Not at the same scale, at least.

    • pulaskiwasright@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I wish the democrats didn’t force her, the candidate that was predicted to be weakest against Trump and the only one likely to lose, through the primary with every trick they could. The democrats tried to skew and steer their own voters and we all lost because of it.

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        She demolished sanders in the primary. Get over it. The belief that she only won because of some dirty tricks or that sanders was screwed is just nonsense. I wish he had won, and i voted for him, but unfortunately reality tells a much different story. This belief he was screwed is no different than the belief that trump was screwed in 2020.

        • retrospectology@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          It’s possible to defeat a popular progressive like sabders when you have the backing of the party establishment and their corporate media apparatus.

          Clinton won her primary through voter suppression by the DNC and corporate, that doesn’t make her a better candidate. The General proved that.

          If she “demolished” Sanders, and then lost to Donald Trump, that means Trump is therefore the “best” candidate. That’s your logic here.

          • EatATaco@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Clinton won her primary through voter suppression by the DNC and corporate

            I’m sure you’ll be able to back this up with some facts.

            If she “demolished” Sanders, and then lost to Donald Trump, that means Trump is therefore the “best” candidate. That’s your logic here.

            At no point did i say she was the best candidate. I even explicitly said that i voted for Sanders, implying i thought he was the better choice. I’m just pointing out the reality that democratic voters overwhelmingly supported Clinton over Sanders.

            • retrospectology@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              Yes and the American people voted for Trump over Clinton, that doesn’t mean he won due to his popularity, he won because he exploited a broken system, same as Clinton exploited a broken system within the DNC.

              Clinton’s primary win is not evidence that she was overwhelmingly popular, it’s evidence that democratic voters was misled about Sanders (who we both supposedly agree is a better candidate). Clinton voters are low-information, a condition that’s fostered deliberately by the DNC and Democrat-aligned corporate media, because if they didn’t decieve people those voters would understand that Sanders is actually someone who would work to deliver the things that benefit all of us.

              If you actually think Sanders is the better candidate then you should agree that most normal people aren’t aware of why. On the other hand, if you think Sanders lost fair and square and democratic voters voted with full knowledge then that’s basically just saying you think progressive policy is a failure on its own merits.

        • pulaskiwasright@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          The delegates all predicated their votes to make it look like Hillary had already won before the elections even started

          • EatATaco@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            So you are saying that millions of people were swayed by super delegates? It was extremely early, NH early, that people started getting pumped that sanders could win. The media hyped up the race despite it never being close.

            It’s grasping at straws to claim that this is why she demolished him.

        • chuckleslord@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          Yeah, the early primaries really do benefit establishment democrats, and it seemingly painted a damning picture for Bernie. I think if we had synchronized primaries, this benefit would be much smaller and Bernie would’ve had a significant shot.

          • Copernican@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            Bernie was such a good surprise candidate, but that only happened because Warren didnt run. I wish she did. I think that was her time and would have avoided some of the criticisms (whether fair or unfairly thrown) at Bernie.

            • retrospectology@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              4 months ago

              Warren backstabbed Sanders in 2016 and 2020 even after she lost, she fell in line with the establushment instead of fighting for what she claims to believe. She’s arguably worse than out and out conservative dems, she’s there to sabotage the left and siphon away votes.