Supreme Court Appears Reluctant to Eliminate Monthly Phone Fee

The Supreme Court held a program that spends more than $ 8 billion in the legality of the Universal Service Fund, low-income and village Americans, as well as a program that helped to enter schools, libraries and hospitals.

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- 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.

“I thought that this was better than expected this morning,” he said.

USF is at the intersections of conservative for a while. Project in 2025, Trump management has a conservative plan 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.

This is the lawyers for the Trump management, claiming that the ‘research’ attacked a Samana in the case of consumers, defended the FCC.

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 cannot do anything through this program to access the services where all the balances are living in many rural areas or to obtain very little profitable ones,” he 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 the research point of consumers: USF fee is an effective tax and it only has the power of a congress.

“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 a universal service administrative company that cannot achieve a private gain.

“Do you really want to cancel a 30-year program for something a few theoros?” Said Blair Levin, FCC and Telecom Industrial Analyst in New Street Research. “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 in the direction, the program will continue to be financed by the right of phone bill in the near future. He said that the telephone accounts of the Internet subsidies are 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 they want,” said Levin. “If you had to cut finance, I think there are a number of rural telephone companies that will go bankrupt.”