Question
In 2005, the Supreme Court heard the case of National Cable & Telecommunications Association v. Brand X Internet Services. The case centered on how the
In 2005, the Supreme Court heard the case of National Cable &
Telecommunications Association v. Brand X Internet Services. The case
centered on how the Telecommunications Act, interpreted and enforced
by the FCC, defined "information service" and "telecommunication
service." The difference in designation mattered because if cable Internet
were classified as a telecommunication service, cable companies would
be considered "common carriers" like phone companies and would
have to make their cable networks available for competitors to use as
well. Brand X, a small Internet provider, argued that cable Internet was
a telecommunication service, not an information service, and Brand
X should have access to the cables to be able to deliver faster Internet
service. The Court found the designation in the Telecommunications
Act vague, and by a 6:3 margin ruled that the FCC, as a congressionally
enabled commission, had the authority to determine the designation of
cable Internet as an information service.
(A) Identify the constitutional principle at issue in this case and in Marbury v. Madison. (See page 199.)
(B) Based on the constitutional principle identified in part A, explain why the facts of Marbury v. Madison (1803) led to a different holding than the holding in National Cable & Telecommunications Association v. Brand X Internet Services.
(C) Describe an action that members of the public who disagree with the holding in National Cable & Telecommunications Association v. Brand X Internet Services could take to limit its impact.
Step by Step Solution
There are 3 Steps involved in it
Step: 1
Get Instant Access to Expert-Tailored Solutions
See step-by-step solutions with expert insights and AI powered tools for academic success
Step: 2
Step: 3
Ace Your Homework with AI
Get the answers you need in no time with our AI-driven, step-by-step assistance
Get Started