The Supreme Court Doesn’t Seem Eager to Axe This $9 Billion Broadband Subsidy

Digital division lawyers, the Supreme Court, the Universal Service Fund (USF), as well as $ 9 billion, as well as 9 billion dollars, as well as $ 9 billion, as well as about $ 9 billion, as well as $ 9 billion, as well as $ 9 billion, as well as $ 9 billion, as well as $ 9 billion didn’t want.

Studies of conservative non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-non-oppression. At the same time Trump management To push for correct changes For a $ 42 billion investment in the village broadband infrastructure, the decision in the USF case of the court has the potential to hold broadband subsidies for 30 years.

Three Liberal Supreme Court Justice, Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh, Swayed did not appear With an argument that the program is not completely inspected by illegal or congress.

“If I had a government, I would feel very good now,” Adam CNET told CNET A legal professor in Rutgers representing FCC during previous trials. “Of course, there was not five votes that want to maintain the fifth round.”

USF is at the intersections of conservative for a while. The project has a conservative plan of Trump 2.0 in 2025 is aggressively followed byThe designated FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr called a new financing mechanism that will make a great technological contribution instead of telephone companies.

“The current approach of FCC is the regulatory equivalent of tax horses to pay highways” Carr wrote In 2023.

However, Carr is still an open question whether technological companies have an appetite to raise the USF bill.

“Since the selection of Trump, he said,” Birl Levin, a former Chief of General Staff and New Street Research, told CNET.

Seems to be unwilling to receive a court program

Legal brief brief information provided by consumer research, the image of the Rampant with the bureaucracy provision – a tax in which they see fit.

“Congress handed over tax power to FCC without objective or meaningful restrictions in tax volume” He wrote lawyers. “FCC ‘wishes’ and allowed the agency to expand its authority for the congress for good measurement.”

However, the fairness sounded greatly from this debate and recalled the views that there were no restrictions.

“This program can do nothing through this program to access the services that live in many rural areas or to get very low-income services,” Kagan said.

The conservative Justice Shamuel Alito, the end of the arguments, concerns about the main influence of the judge’s USF.

“What would it be affected by people in rural areas if it was organized in non-constitutional and congress?” Alito asked.

Alito was considered as one of the most likely justice against the FCC, but the questions were questioned.

“I thought it was very surprising, because it could not be ready to pull him into a trigger, even if it was sympathetic to the position.”

Perhaps were more important than the questions asked.

“The soldier was very quiet,” he said. “I read his silence, I also read, probably more likely to stick with the status quo.”

What is the Universal Service Fund?

Draw your phone bill and search for a CTRL + F for “Universal service”. You will most likely see that the program has hit a few dollars. The Federal Communications Commission collects money from telecommunications companies – not individuals – but it is a standard experience to pass by customers.

This is a research point of consumers: USF fee is an effective tax and it only has the power to do anything.

“The applicants are a sharp detail that can leave for bureaucrats to fill the size of a multi-billion dollar social well-being program,” the study of consumers ” briefly argued.

It is an idea called “Universal Service” in the center of USF Case. 1934 communication act stated that “All people in the United States must have access to adequate charges in accordance with appropriate, effective, national communication services.”

In 1996, an update for communication law, USF, FCC has created an independent program with FCC’s permission, which expands the broadband Internet access to broadband Internet.

Four programs targeting different aspects of USF digital division: The Connect the American Fund (rural areas), All one’s life (low-income users), E-Heat (Schools and Libraries) and Rural Health Program. This is managed by the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) that is not specific to private profits.

“Do you really want to open a 30-year program for some theoretical something?” Levin said. “This is a very popular program, especially because he serves many people.”

What’s next?

Probably the Supreme Court probably does not hear anything new about the USF case unless you decide at the end of June. If the court goes direction, the program will be financed by a telephone invoice fee in the near future. This idea of ​​financing internet subsidies with the phone bill is probably long-term long-term.

“Economic Problem – Financing Needs financed in a growing income base, at least the last two administrations, nothing outside the discussions in Congress,” Levin wrote to investors.

The court will open the USF financing mechanism in a chance to find illegally, the number of potential roads will be opened. Would they give congress and FCC times to reform the program or find alternative finances?

“I think Levin said.” If you had to cut finance, I think there are a number of rural telephone companies to go bankrupt. “