New York Attorney General Leads Filing of Multi-State Lawsuit to Block Rollback of Net Neutrality

New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman this afternoon announced that he and 22 other Attorneys General have teamed up to file a lawsuit aiming to stop the Federal Communications Commission's planned rollback of net neutrality.

The multi-state lawsuit [PDF] asks the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to review the FCC's repeal order, calling it arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion that violates federal law.


"An open internet - and the free exchange of ideas it allows - is critical to our democratic process," Schneiderman said in a statement on his website. "The repeal of net neutrality would turn internet service providers into gatekeepers - allowing them to put profits over consumers while controlling what we see, what we do, and what we say online. This would be a disaster for New York consumers and businesses, and for everyone who cares about a free and open internet."

The FCC has not filed its new rules with the Federal Register, so the repeal is not yet final, but the lawsuit has been filed out of "an abundance of caution" and to "preserve the right to be included in the judicial lottery procedure." It's essentially the states' way of establishing the first step towards a full challenge of the FCC's decision.


The lawsuit is backed by Attorneys General of New York, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and the District of Columbia.

In related net neutrality news, 50 senators have now endorsed a legislative measure to override the FCC's net neutrality repeal, reports The Washington Post. With one additional Republican vote, a Senate resolution of disapproval will be able to be passed, but it will still need to make it to the House and be signed by President Trump.

Note: Due to the political nature of the discussion regarding this topic, the discussion thread is located in our Politics, Religion, Social Issues forum. All forum members and site visitors are welcome to read and follow the thread, but posting is limited to forum members with at least 100 posts.

Popular Stories

Apple Announces Special Event in New York Feature

Apple Announces Special Event in New York, London, and Shanghai on March 4

Monday February 16, 2026 6:05 am PST by
Apple today announced a "special Apple Experience" in New York, London, and Shanghai, taking place on March 4, 2026 at 9:00am ET. Apple invited select members of the media to the event in three major cities around the world. It is simply described as a "special Apple Experience," and there is no further information about what it may entail. The invitation features a 3D Apple logo design...
M3 iPad Air

Apple's Next Two Products Are Coming Soon

Thursday February 12, 2026 11:17 am PST by
Apple plans to release an iPhone 17e and an iPad Air with an M4 chip "in the coming weeks," according to the latest word from Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. "Apple retail employees say that inventory of the iPhone 16e has basically dried out and the iPad Air is seeing shortages as well," said Gurman. "I've been expecting new versions of both (iPhone 17e and M4 iPad Air) in the coming weeks."...
Apple Announces Special Event in New York Feature 1

Apple Event on March 4: Here's What to Expect

Tuesday February 17, 2026 8:08 am PST by
Apple on Monday invited selected journalists and content creators to a "special Apple Experience" on Wednesday, March 4 in New York, London, and Shanghai. At an Apple Experience, attendees are typically given the opportunity to try out Apple's latest hardware or software. Following the launch of Apple Creator Studio last month, for example, some content creators attended an Apple Experience...
iphone 17 pro dark blue 1

Gurman: iPhone 18 Pro Could Be Underwhelming

Monday February 16, 2026 4:24 am PST by
Apple's upcoming iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max models "won't be a big update," according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman. In the latest edition of his "Power On" newsletter, Gurman said that the iPhone 18 Pro models will "represent minor tweaks from last year's iPhone 17 Pro and 17 Pro Max." He compared the upgrade to Apple's past practice of appending the letter "S" to its more minor...
Coffee Burgundy and Purple iPhone 18 Pro Mock

Five iPhone 18 Pro Features Revealed in New Report

Friday February 13, 2026 8:43 am PST by
While the iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max are still seven months away, an analyst has revealed five new features the devices will allegedly have. Rumored color options for the iPhone 18 Pro models In a research note with investment firm GF Securities on Thursday, analyst Jeff Pu outlined the following upgrades for the iPhone 18 Pro models: Smaller Dynamic Island: It has been rumored...

Top Rated Comments

106 months ago
This is nothing but sad. Folks please read the so called net neutrality rules. Before these rules there were no federal control and the net survived just fine. These rules claim rights for the FCC that the government has never had with respect to the internet. And internet freedom is one of the keys to its success.

Competition will keep the internet open, unless the government takes over, then the government will use these rules to regulate the internet just like they did with the IRS to silence conservatives organizations, just like they did with the FBI , the federal judges, and the NSA to attempt to sabotage a presidential election, they will implement the rules that Google and Twitter want in order to silence those with out favor views.

The attempt to say that these rules are for Net Neutrality is nothing but lies and fake news, they are nothing but the groundwork for government's forced control of the internet.
Score: 24 Votes (Like | Disagree)
jarman92 Avatar
106 months ago
Not as bad as the left wing but jobs.
Burn.


Except that makes no sense, since 100% of the opposition to net neutrality is from the right. So you're wrong.
[doublepost=1516149164][/doublepost]
This is nothing but sad. Folks please read the so called net neutrality rules. Before these rules there were no federal control and the net survived just fine. These rules claim rights for the FCC that the government has never had with respect to the internet. And internet freedom is one of the keys to its success.

Competition will keep the internet open, unless the government takes over, then the government will use these rules to regulate the internet just like they did with the IRS to silence conservatives organizations, just like they did with the FBI , the federal judges, and the NSA to attempt to sabotage a presidential election, they will implement the rules that Google and Twitter want in order to silence those with out favor views.

The attempt to say that these rules are for Net Neutrality is nothing but lies and fake news, they are nothing but the groundwork for government's forced control of the internet.
Is that you, Ajit?

Your comment has a number of glaring factual errors (I would say lies, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt):
The only reason Wheeler classified ISPs under Title II is because the courts rejected their previous rules—after a lawsuit from Verizon, of course—and insisted they use their current powers under Title II. So this "government never had power" argument is BS.
The idea of "competition" with ISPs is absolutely laughable, since Comcast absolutely dominated the market. For example, I live in the tri-state area and have exactly one option for cable and broadband. What do I do when Comcast tried to screw me? What competition is pushing them to be better? Who do I complain to when they throttle my Netflix/Facebook/CNN/Snapchat?
Your reference to the IRS makes no sense whatsoever. And the rules under Pai would allow Comcast to charge your precious Fox and/or Breitbart and/or whatever your propaganda outlet of choice is more money to keep reaching their audiences. Fox is particularly susceptible to this because they're one of the few major networks not owned by a massive corporation; Comcast and AT&T will have no problem streaming CNN and MSNBC to their respective customers.
Finally, your use of "fake news" is not only pathetic, its nonsensical.
[doublepost=1516149254][/doublepost]
We'll see how long that takes. Just look at Apple vs. Samsung, for example. Never-ending.
Not really the same situation. Federal courts tend to resolve public disputes as quickly as possible, particularly when they have such far-reaching consequences.
Score: 21 Votes (Like | Disagree)
AllergyDoc Avatar
106 months ago
"arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion that violates federal law."

lol That describes about a quarter of what Obama did while in office.
Score: 20 Votes (Like | Disagree)
bradl Avatar
106 months ago
"arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion that violates federal law."

lol That describes about a quarter of what Obama did while in office.
Yet none of what you are claiming could be proven...

... yet you have Trump doing the exact thing you claim. Trust me, you don't want to go down this road.

BL.
Score: 20 Votes (Like | Disagree)
acblue94 Avatar
106 months ago
Sucks that the House has so many right wing nut jobs...I find it very hard to believe if the House and Senate managed to pass the CRA bill and send it to Trump’s desk that he wouldn’t sign it.
Not as bad as the left wing but jobs.
Score: 15 Votes (Like | Disagree)
106 months ago
What they call "freedom of the internet" is really "freedom from paying other people for access to their infrastructure."

Why do you think every media outlet, bar none, are pro NN? It's not because it's a good idea.
Score: 13 Votes (Like | Disagree)