Analyzing the Charter-Cox Merger

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

Earlier this year, Charter Communications, Incorporated and Cox Communications announced a $34.5 billion proposed merger. If completed, the combined company would become both the largest cable television provider and the largest broadband provider in the country.

At first glance, one might be concerned about a proposal to merge the second and third-largest cable providers into a single behemoth. But to describe the merger in these simplistic terms fails to appreciate both the challenges facing companies in mature industries and the revolutionary changes affecting the telecommunications industry. This proposed deal is not a power grab, but a rational response to a maturing, intensely competitive market. That’s the argument that I’ve made in my latest article as part of the Free State Foundation’s Perspectives series.

Continue reading

Carr Reins in FCC Overreach on School Wi-Fi

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Brendan Carr has been in the news a lot lately. Under his energetic leadership, the agency has pursued an ambitious agenda at a breakneck pace. And while he has taken flak (including from me) for some of his high-profile controversies—perhaps most notably threatening Jimmy Kimmel like a second-rate Jersey mob boss—he deserves significant credit for the less flashy efforts his team is taking behind the scenes to restore the agency’s proper role and rein in the prior administration’s excesses. One such effort was last month’s decision to terminate E-Rate funding for Wi-Fi hotspot lending and school bus Wi-Fi access. While the merits of those programs can be debated, they clearly exceeded the statute’s bounds, and the FCC was right to rein them in.

Continue reading

Court Strikes Down Law Regulating Election-Related AI Content

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

By reducing traditional barriers of content creation, the AI revolution holds the potential to unleash an explosion in creative expression. It also increases the societal risks associated with the spread of misinformation. This tension is the subject of a recent landmark judicial decision, Babylon Bee v Bonta (hat tip to Ajit Pai, whose social media account remains an outstanding follow). The eponymous satirical news site and others challenged California’s AB 2839, which prohibited the dissemination of “materially deceptive” AI-generated audio or video content related to elections. Although the court recognized that the case presented a novel question about “synthetically edited or digitally altered” content, it struck down the law, concluding that the rise of AI does not justify a departure from long-standing First Amendment principles.

Continue reading

Prison Call Order Delays Reform of Market Ripe for Disruption

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

Earlier this summer, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) unexpectedly delayed implementation of its 2024 prison call order until 2027. The order, which was mandated by Congress and had bipartisan support in the agency and on Capitol Hill, sought to correct long-standing market distortions through a combination of cost-based pricing and competition-friendly rules. The delay was requested by incumbent providers and correctional facilities based on unexpected implementation challenges. But this postponement is unfortunate, coming right as new entrants such as Ameelio are poised to challenge those incumbents and perpetuating inefficiencies, high costs, and limited innovation in a sector ripe for disruption.

Continue reading

Surprise! USF Decision Signals Admin Law Revolution, But Not the One We Expected

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

Late last month, the Supreme Court decided FCC v. Consumers Research. Although an undercard among the Court’s last-day decisions, the case was closely watched in administrative law circles as a potential vehicle for revitalizing the moribund Nondelegation Doctrine. But as predicted after oral argument, the Court found this was not the right case to do so. The big surprise was Justice Kavanaugh’s concurrence, which likely killed future efforts to reform nondelegation, but also signaled big news ahead for the law governing independent agencies.

Continue reading

NTIA Streamlines BEAD Program, But Risks Further Delays

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

On June 6, the National Telecommunications & Information Administration (NTIA) issued its long-awaited overhaul of the $42.45 billion Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program. This new policy notice repeals many administrative burdens imposed by Biden-era NTIA oversight and aligns the program more closely with Congress’s original intent. This revised guidance promises to enhance broadband deployment by increasing flexibility and reducing costs to taxpayers. But it also risks further delays in a program already criticized for its sluggish rollout—and in the meantime, private enterprise is closing many of the coverage gaps BEAD sought to address.

Continue reading

The House Should Act Quickly to Repeal the Illegal, Expensive E-Rate Expansion

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

Earlier this month, the Senate passed S.J.Res.7. The resolution, sponsored by Senator Ted Cruz, would repeal a Biden-era Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rule allowing E-Rate funds to subsidize Wi-Fi hotspot lending programs for off-campus use. This well-intentioned but misguided rule violates clear statutory limits on agency power and threatens an increasingly unstable Universal Service Fund (USF). The House should follow the Senate’s lead to revoke this initiative before the estimated June 4 deadline for congressional action.

Continue reading

So, Are We Gonna Ban TikTok, Or…?

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

It has been 373 days since Congress enacted the TikTok divest-or-ban law, 105 days since the Supreme Court unanimously upheld the law as constitutional, and over three months since the ban was scheduled to take effect. Yet except for a brief Inauguration Day interruption, the Chinese-controlled app has been, and remains, readily available in the United States, collecting data on 170 million Americans—data that could potentially be exploited by foreign adversaries.

Continue reading

The Supreme Court Seems Unlikely to Revive Nondelegation Doctrine in FCC Case

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

Earlier this month, I previewed the arguments in Federal Communications Commission v Consumers’ Research. The case asks the Supreme Court whether the FCC’s Universal Service Fund (USF) violates the nondelegation doctrine, which prohibits Congress from delegating the legislative power to executive branch agencies. As my previous post explains, nondelegation is a largely toothless doctrine, mostly dormant since 1935. But in recent years, five of the nine Supreme Court justices have expressed an interest in revitalizing the doctrine, given the right case in which to do so.

Continue reading

Will FCC v. Consumers’ Research Revive the Nondelegation Doctrine?

This guest post by BC Law Professor and Associate Dean of Academic Affairs Daniel Lyons first appeared in the AEIdeas Blog.

The idea behind the nondelegation doctrine is sound: Congress should not delegate legislative power to executive branch agencies. But its implementation leaves much to be desired. Nearly every nondelegation case acknowledges there’s a theoretical boundary but then finds that Congress hasn’t crossed it here. Only twice has the Supreme Court found a law violated the nondelegation doctrine, in 1935, both involving a statute that literally allowed President Roosevelt to cartelize the entire economy and make rules at whim. The modern rule allows Congress to give agencies significant authority as long as it includes an “intelligible principle” to guide exercise of that authority. Perhaps more than any other doctrine, this toothless standard has permitted the modern atrophy of our legislative branch, concentrated power in unelected bureaucrats, and enabled the imperial presidencies of the 21st century.

Continue reading