NEWS
Federal Communications Commission
445 12
th
Street, S.W.
Washington, DC  20554
This is an unofficial announcement of Commission action.  Release of the full text of a Commission order constitutes official action.
See MCI v. FCC, 515 F.2d 385 (D.C. Cir. 1974).
News Media Information: (202) 418-0500
Internet: http://www.fcc.gov
TTY: (888) 835-5322
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT:
March 12, 2015 Matthew Berry (202) 418-2005
Email: Matthew.Berry@fcc.gov
LEGAL SUMMARY OF FCC COMMISSIONER AJIT PAI’S
STATEMENT DISSENTING FROM THE FCC’S DECISION TO ADOPT
PRESIDENT OBAMA’S PLAN TO REGULATE THE INTERNET
? In adopting President Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet, the FCC violated the procedural 
requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
o The FCC never proposed the rules being adopted, violating the APA’s notice-and-comment 
requirement.  In last year’s Notice, the FCC proposed rules under section 706 of the 
Telecommunications Act.  Every single proposal and every single tentative conclusion in last 
year’s Notice was tailored to avoid reclassifying broadband as a Title II service.  Yet that’s 
exactly what the FCC does in this Order.
o No one could have anticipated the number or nature of the hoops the Order would jump 
through to reclassify broadband.  Nor could anyone have anticipated the Order’s 49 separate 
forbearance decisions; its decision to subject interconnection to Title II as a “component” of 
broadband Internet access service; its decision to amend agency rules regarding mobile 
broadband; or its adoption of an omnivorous “Internet conduct” standard, the scope of which 
remains uncertain. 
o The FCC cannot rely on President Obama’s YouTube directive to the agency cure these 
deficiencies.  The President’s video was not approved by FCC commissioners, published in the 
Federal Register, or subject to public comment.
? President Obama’s plan to regulate the Internet also violates the Communications Act.
o Neither the text of the Act nor FCC precedent allows the agency to reclassify broadband 
Internet access service as a Title II telecommunications service. In 1996, President Clinton 
and Congress decided that “any” service that “provides access to the Internet” would be an 
information service.  In turn, the FCC has never classified an Internet Service Provider as a 
telecommunications carrier.  Instead, the FCC has determined each and every time since the 
Clinton Administration’s Stevens Report that Internet access always involves more than mere
transmission—and thus is an information service.
o Section 332 of the Communications Act independently bars the FCC from reclassifying 
mobile broadband Internet access service as a Title II telecommunications service.
o The text, structure, and Congressional intent all make clear that section 706 of the 
Telecommunications Act does not give the FCC any independent authority.
o The Order invents an entirely new method of forbearance analysis that doesn’t adhere to 
the forbearance criteria in the Act or the FCC’s precedents.