The Supreme Court won't take up net neutrality - this time

In doing so, government lawyers sought to bypass federal appeals courts that have yet to rule definitively on the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. "The ISPs went all out to push FCC Chairman Ajit Pai to repeal the agency's Net Neutrality rules-and then ran to the Supreme Court looking for a do-over on earlier cases that rightly upheld those rules".

The appeal was unusual in that the FCC's 2015 net neutrality rules have already been repealed under the current administration, following a Commission vote last December in which members voted 3-2 along party lines.

Kavanaugh ruled on the issue while an appeals court judge and Roberts has an investment portfolio that includes telecommunications companies.

The Supreme Court said Monday that it will not hear a closely watched case over the future of the internet - rejecting a petition by telecom industry groups to consider net neutrality, or the principle that internet providers should treat all online content equally.

Instead, the Supreme Court declined to do so.

That's important because it give an indication of how the conservative side of the court will vote when the issue of net neutrality does eventually make its way to the country's highest court. Jonathan Spalter, CEO of USTelecom, and other supporters of the Restoring Internet Freedom order, which negated net neutrality, believe broadband is an information service. But the justices refused to hear the appeals, leaving the lower court ruling in place.

That opinion, in 2016, held that the Federal Communications Commission had acted within its powers when it approved sweeping new rules the year before that imposed new obligations on internet providers such as AT&T, Comcast and Verizon.

The FCC's repeal of net neutrality is also the subject of separate legal battles, after it was challenged by tech companies and advocacy groups, in addition to more than 20 US states. "But Chief Justice John Roberts also recused himself - presumably (although there is no way to know for sure) because he owns stock in one of the companies challenging the rules".

It also aimed to remove the lower court's verdict from the books so that it couldn't be used as a precedent, something that could prove significant given the ongoing legal actions that challenge the FCC's 2017 repeal of net neutrality.