FCC quacks duck court showdown (Commentary)

Thw Washington Times ^ | June 17, 2011 | Seton Motley

[jazusamo]

June 21 marks the six-month anniversary of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) illegally imposing itself on the World Wide Web in order to assert patently absurd “net neutrality” rules.

A half-year later, the FCC still has not filed the order with the Federal Register, which is where all new rules and regulations must go to begin their imposition.

What’s the holdup? There are several possibilities, some or all of which may be why the FCC is so thoroughly slow-playing it. (Please note that it took the FCC less than a month - April 7 to May 6 - to file its wireless data-roaming seizure - so it can get things done when it wants to.)

One possibility for the delay: Two wireless providers - Verizon and Metro PCS - had filed suit to undo FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski’s net neutrality order. Verizon had sought relief in the same U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that unanimously ruled in April 2010 that the FCC has no net neutrality authority.

The court dismissed the suit, saying the company couldn’t contest the rules until the agency published them. But the court’s docket is moving along and the clock ticking. The longer the chairman drags his feet on the net neutrality order, the less likely it becomes that the court will be able to hear the case. By stalling, the chairman is callously venue-shopping - and ducking a court in which he knows he most likely will lose.

This demonstrates just how proud the FCC must be of the shabby lawyering - and linguistic and intellectual contortions - it has executed to try to re-concoct justification for its second unjustifiable and illegal Internet power grab.

[Rocky]

I would like to see unemployment increase. I mean, I would like to see a whole lot of government workers put out of work.

[Monorprise]

If Obama can do all this, then surely a Conservative president can shut down all of theses agency’s by simply choosing to fire all their employees.

Whether they are unable to spend money & usurp freedom for lack of function or are unable to spend money & usurp freedom for lack of congressional authorization. We save just as much money and freedom. At least for the time of the presidency, by which time it ends the people will find out just how little they need that Government bureaucracy and rules.

[jazusamo]

Yep, these type fiascoes are why a conservative president has to be elected, they’d be the only one to do some serious house cleaning.

[Monorprise]

“Yep, these type fiascoes are why a conservative president has to be elected, they’d be the only one to do some serious house cleaning.”

Somehow I doubt a Conservative would really take advantage of the many ways in which they might abuse their power to shut things down.

When you think about it a president could:

1: “deliberately” Dismiss or “miss-allocate” the human resources of every ad odds federal department as to “inadvertently” cause them to completely shut down(IE dysfunction). lol

2: A president could liberate the people from the effects iqnoring of certainty repressive federal laws by issuing blanket Pardons at regular intervals.

So the enforcement wouldn’t exist, and a future president could not punish people for “breaking federal laws” not being enforced later due to pardons. But of course both actions would only be as temporary as the Presidents term of office. Permanently abolishing theses departments wont happen until congress acts to repeal their previous actions.

To my knowledge no president has used his power in this way, but we know it can happen, after all Obama has choose not to enforce Federal Drug laws in Califorina, and Jimmy Carter pardoned all the draft Dogers.

Clearly it is possible to utilize the powers of the presidency to temporary shut down departments of the Federal Government.

A truly Conservative president would do exactly that in order expose the people their lack of need for theses departments and to defend the Constitution of the United States by stopping unconstitutional usurpation.