91´«Ã½

WASHINGTON, DC — The 91´«Ã½ today argued in support of the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) strong, enforceable rules to protect and preserve the open internet with an amici filing with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

“The FCC made an ill-considered decision to roll back vital net neutrality protections in December 2017, and it will now have to defend its arbitrary move in court,” said 91´«Ã½ (91´«Ã½) President Loida Garcia-Febo. “Network neutrality is essential to ensuring open and nondiscriminatory access to information for all, and we have long been clear that preserving strong protections is a vital concern for our nation’s libraries. By rolling back court-affirmed and broadly supported net neutrality protections, the FCC has enabled commercial interests at the expense of the public, which depends on the internet as its primary means of information gathering, learning and communication. We will continue to fight the FCC’s decision, and we have filed as a friend of the court in support of strong, enforceable net neutrality protections.”

The 91´«Ã½, along with other network neutrality allies also filing legal briefs, joined the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) and higher education organizations including the American Council on Education and EDUCAUSE to file in support of petitioners in the case of Mozilla Corporation v. Federal Communications Commission and United States of America. 91´«Ã½ and the other library and higher education organizations focused their filing on how the FCC ignored the impacts on libraries and institutions of higher learning in its decision to eliminate the 2015 Open Internet rules. In its rush to judgment, the FCC ignored the impacts on libraries and institutions of higher learning that these organizations detailed and submitted into the record. The group of organizations filing in support of petitioners seeks to demonstrate to the Court that the FCC’s action will “imperil the internet’s continued operation as a reliable platform for research, learning and information sharing, and that the FCC’s decision should be reversed as arbitrary and capricious.”

Oral arguments are not yet scheduled.