Support #Amexit to Get US Out! of the UN
http://www.jbs.org/federal-legislative-action-alerts?vvsrc=%2fcampaigns%2f47237%2frespond
Posted on 09/29/2016 10:49:05 AM PDT by Freedom56v2
Four Republican state attorneys general are suing to stop the Obama administration from transferring oversight of the internet to an international body, arguing the transition would violate the U.S. Constitution.
The lawsuit — filed Wednesday in a Texas federal court — threatens to throw up a new roadblock to one of the White House’s top tech priorities, just days before the scheduled Oct. 1 transfer of the internet’s address system is set to take place.
In their lawsuit, the attorneys general for Arizona, Oklahoma, Nevada and Texas contend that the transition, lacking congressional approval, amounts to an illegal giveaway of U.S. government property. They also express fear that the proposed new steward of the system, a nonprofit known as ICANN, would be so unchecked that it could “effectively enable or prohibit speech on the Internet.”
The four states also contend that ICANN could revoke the U.S. government’s exclusive use of .gov and .mil, the domains used by states, federal agencies and the U.S. military for their websites. And the four attorneys general argue that ICANN’s “current practices often foster a lack of transparency that, in turn, allows illegal activity to occur.”
The Commerce Department could not be immediately reached for comment. Previously, federal officials have said any delay to their transition plans would embolden the U.S. government’s harshest critics.
Larry Strickling, the leader of the Commerce Department-based agency handling the initiative, said earlier this month that the government had spent “two years developing a plan,” stressing that any last-minute attempt to abandon it would “hurt the credibility of America in the eyes of the rest of the world.” And his agency repeatedly has refused some of the claims made in the lawsuit filed Wednesday.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
For example, it's pointed to a study by the Government Accountability Office, a federal watchdog, which concluded that the transition does not wrongly turn over U.S. government property.
Since the 1990s, the U.S. has sought to unwind its influence from the Web’s architecture, arguing that experts from the international community — and not governments, including Washington — should oversee its day-to-day operations.
But the transition of the domain-name system to ICANN gained new momentum in the aftermath of Edward Snowden’s leaks about U.S. surveillance, with the Obama administration eager to avoid criticism from world leaders that Washington has too much power over the internet.
Tech companies have largely supported that plan, which the Commerce Department first announced in 2014. But conservatives on Capitol Hill, led by Sen. Ted Cruz, have argued that by loosening its grip on the internet, the administration will empower the likes of Russia and China and give them a bigger opening to control and censor the web.
Cruz initially sought to block the transfer as part of the Senate’s latest spending deal, hoping to revive a congressional ban on the Commerce Department’s ICANN work from the previous budget. He even enlisted the help of GOP nominee Donald Trump, who chided the Obama administration for risking the future of internet freedom.
But Senate lawmakers, fearing a shutdown, ultimately opted against blocking the internet governance transition as part of a budget deal brokered on Wednesday. The House, hours later, followed suit. Yet House Republicans have not yet decided whether they intend to launch a legal campaign of their own and vote to launch a similar lawsuit against the Obama administration over the internet issue.
Did those wimps in congress find their safe place with coloring books and binkys.They need to be gone!
Bookmark
So we have to tie it up in courts.
Joy.
All the while this clown can be handing the store over to the UN while some corksucker in a black robe will get around to it in a few months?
So we have to tie it up in courts.
Joy.
All the while this clown can be handing the store over to the UN while some corksucker in a black robe will get around to it in a few months?
__________________________________
Maybe they can get an injunction?
I am going to call to get info...see if we can help...
Where are Ted Cruz or other so called “conservatives” hiding when this is about to go down in mere hours?
He will do it anyway......Obama doesn’t care what the court orders.....and he and his minions have NEVER been held to account for any of their lawlessness. Defying court orders is no biggie for them.
The media has hidden this Obama giving the
Internet away to dictatorships
any last-minute attempt to abandon it would “hurt the credibility of America in the eyes of the rest of the world.”
If Obama cared about our credibility he would have resigned years ago.
They already tried to stop it in Congress but traitor McConnell and his brood bowled right over them to help Obama.
Otherwise our posts may all look like this:
Of course Obama’s Judges will say it’s Unconstitutional to keep it ,they use the Constitution to declare everything Unconstitutional
Didn’t a judge order/rule Obama stop his immigration scam?
Yet he ignored and continued?
So.... at this point what difference does it make?
“And his agency repeatedly has refused some of the claims made in the lawsuit filed Wednesday.”
I presume they meant “refuted” here, not “refused”. But maybe not.
Could you just possibly be slightly encouraged...
Too damn bad. Most of them doubt our credibility anyway, thanks to obama.
Here are 2 more threads...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3475042/posts?page=1
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3474925/posts
They....”contend that the transition, lacking congressional approval, amounts to an illegal giveaway of U.S. government property. They also express fear that the proposed new steward of the system, a nonprofit known as ICANN, would be so unchecked that it could “effectively enable or prohibit speech on the Internet.”
Looks that way to me......ICANN should not be trusted.
They....”contend that the transition, lacking congressional approval, amounts to an illegal giveaway of U.S. government property. They also express fear that the proposed new steward of the system, a nonprofit known as ICANN, would be so unchecked that it could “effectively enable or prohibit speech on the Internet.”
Looks that way to me......ICANN should not be trusted.
This is a basic fact that seems to have been lost in all the hoopla...but then when has the law every stopped this administration?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.