California agrees not to enforce Internet neutrality law as Justice Ministry suspends trial

California has entered into a temporary agreement with the Department of Justice to refrain from litigation against the federal government to challenge the new Internet neutrality law, delaying a crucial legal battle for the future of the Internet. Internet.

The Justice Department will adjourn its lawsuit against the state until a separate case directly involving the Federal Communications Commission continues its course, according to documents filed by the court Friday. The agreement must be approved by a judge.

As part of the deal, California officials have agreed not to enforce their new broadband rules when state law – considered by many to be the most severe in the US – will formally enter into force. force on 1 January.

[Battle lines taking shape in California’s net neutrality fight with DOJ]

Signed by Governor Jerry Brown (D) last month, the law prohibits companies such as AT & T and Comcast from blocking or slowing down online content and prohibits them from charging special fees for websites and apps .

"We are committed to providing a free and open Internet to Californians," said California Attorney General Xavier Becerra. "Every action we take, every action we launch aims to put us in the best possible position to preserve the neutrality of the internet for the 40 million inhabitants of our state."

The Department of Justice did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The agreement underscores the complexity of the net neutrality battle, as well as the huge issues surrounding a case brought in Washington by consumer rights groups and digital rights groups, calling on the decision of the FCC to cancel its own Net Neutrality rules.

This case comes up against some of the same issues that are currently facing California, including whether the FCC's new, lighter approach to internet neutrality takes precedence over state laws. A decision of the US Court of Appeals for the US circuit could have significant consequences on the prosecution of the Justice Department.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions alleged that California law violated the Constitution by circumventing the FCC's deregulation order. However, if the Supreme Court of Canada circuit rejects the FCC rule change in 2017 under the FCC's chairmanship, Ajit Pai, new questions may arise about the level of security of federal regulators in states like California, which are pre-empting.

In a statement Friday, Pai celebrated the deal, calling it a "substantial concession" on the part of California. "I'm delighted that California has agreed not to enforce its expensive regulations on the Internet," Pai said. "This substantial concession reflects the strength of the case presented by the United States earlier this month."

California law advocates, known as SB 822, have expressed confidence that the legal battle will end in their favor.

"Internet neutrality guarantees open access to the Internet and ensures that each of us can decide where to go on the Internet, unlike Internet Service Providers who make this decision for us," said Scott Wiener. senator from the state who co-wrote the legislation. "I welcome the success of litigation on this issue and the re-establishment of strong net neutrality protections in our state."

Proponents of the broadband industry who have joined the California lawsuit have called the deal "a winner for consumers". The coalition brings together the main associations of the country in the fields of wireless, cable and telecommunications.

"Our societies support an open internet," said the group in a joint statement Friday, "and we urge Congress to address this problem by adopting a national framework to protect this principle for all Americans."