Looking at Loper Bright More Broadly (Jim Harper, 7/31/24, AEIdeas)
Loper Bright restored courts’ authority to determine the law, as opposed to giving agencies the power to decide what their authorizing statutes mean. This, Lyons rightly says, will pose challenges to “FCC initiatives that capitalized on ambiguous language to accomplish the agency’s policy objectives.”
He’s right, and it is amazing to observe that net neutrality regulation—the law governing the provision of internet service—has been a political ping-pong ball. It has absurdly changed (or threatened to change) with each change of political control in the White House. In what kind of banana republic does the law change simply with the election of one candidate or another? That is no “rule of law” country.