3 ms·

I read...somewhere, can't find it now that I try to go looking for the source...that the most likely remedy, in that article's opinion, is the Administrative Pr

I read...somewhere, can't find it now that I try to go looking for the source...that the most likely remedy, in that article's opinion, is the Administrative Procedures Act. The author basically said that the APA doesn't permit reversing rules without a factual basis as to why they should be reversed, particularly if the rules being reversed were recently adopted using a stronger evaluation. I'm not versed in the APA at all so I might be remembering the article wrong but it seemed reasonable.

shkkmo 9y ago
I think this is the piece you are referring to: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/22/opinion/courts-net-neutrality-fcc.html?mtrref=www.google.ca&assetType=opinion https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/22/opinion/courts-net-neutra... Most relevant section: >So drastic is the reversal of policy (if, as expected, the commission approves Mr. Pai’s proposal next month), and so weak is the evidence to support the change, that it seems destined to be struck down in court. > The problem for Mr. Pai is that government agencies are not free to abruptly reverse longstanding rules on which many have relied without a good reason, such as a change in factual circumstances. A mere change in F.C.C. ideology isn’t enough. As the Supreme Court has said, a federal agency must “examine the relevant data and articulate a satisfactory explanation for its action.” Given that net neutrality rules have been a huge success by most measures, the justification for killing them would have to be very strong. However, a legal challenge will likely take a while to wend it's way to the Supreme Court.