A $ 8 billion subsidy may be supported by the Internet in rural schools, libraries and hospitals by the Supreme Court

The conservative advocacy group is trying to close the old practice that is to make our telecommunications telecommunications companies drive to build a wide range of access in remote areas of the country. The Supreme Court heard the arguments of the group, and despite its conservative tendencies, It seems prepared To support the countryside focusing.

For 30 years, the Federal Communications Committee has collected money from US Communications as part of the World Service Fund. The Federal Communications Committee (FCC) runs the fund, but was established after Congress approved the 1996 Communications Law.

The conservative invitation group called consumer research called this practice, describing it unconstitutional, and the case has arisen along the way to the highest court on the ground. Although the court was a majority of 6-3, the judges on both sides of the political spectrum seemed skeptical in the arguments offered by the lawyer for consumer research.

TRENT MCCOTER, one of the group’s lawyer, argued that one of the cases in the program is that he has no specific maximum. “There are no clear limits for the Federal Communications Committee’s ability to specify the amount to be lifted.”

Conservative justice, Brett Cavano and Amy Connect, acquired the idea. “Your position may say, I think, a solution to the problem you determine can be a trillion dollar roof or a $ 100 billion roof. This makes the situation seem … What are you trying exactly?” Cavano request.

“This looks a little hollow,” said Barrett. “Somewhat looks like a meaningless exercise.”

The judges also argued whether the Federal Communications Committee was technically a fee or tax and what the implications might have. Judge Neil Gorskuh said: “This is just a direct tax without any digital limit, that is, a ceiling, any price. We had nothing like that before,” said Judge Neil Gorskuh. “I do not say that taxes are especially. I just say what is unique in this case is that we have a tax that does not resemble any other tax that this court agreed to at all. It is not a cost -related fee, and it is not the determination of a monopoly rate.”

Most judges are concerned about the consequences of ending the program. These consequences are very real. The amount imposed over the three years has changed, but at the present time the Federal Communications Committee (FCC) gets about $ 8 billion annually from this practice and uses cash to improve the Internet in hospitals, schools and libraries in rural areas in the United States
“You do not see the risks that we make judges to overcome popularity – and I know that you do not care that they are common, but it is common, meaning that Congress has been old – software?” Judge Kitanji Brown Jackson asked at the end of the procedure.

The arguments of this case have been completed and the rulers are expected to be sentenced at some point in June.