California fights "preposterous" Trump admin demand to scrap state broadband laws

本文为原文前 6,000 字符的节选翻译，完整内容请查看原文。

California is accepting $1.42 billion in broadband grant funding from the Trump administration, but the state is not accepting the Trump administration’s demand that it stop enforcing a net neutrality law and other telecom regulations. California’s stand against the Trump administration could result in multiple legal battles involving the state, federal government, and Internet providers seeking government funds.

加利福尼亚州正在接受特朗普政府提供的 14.2 亿美元宽带拨款，但该州拒绝接受特朗普政府提出的停止执行网络中立性法律及其他电信法规的要求。加州对特朗普政府的抵制可能会引发涉及州政府、联邦政府以及寻求政府资金的互联网服务提供商之间的多场法律诉讼。

Although California told the federal government it would accept the money, it is reserving the right to challenge the condition imposed by the US. The state could delay or cancel plans to distribute broadband grants depending on how the process unfolds. The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) decided last year that states must agree not to enforce any rate regulation or net neutrality rule on ISPs that receive money from the $42 billion Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program.

尽管加州告知联邦政府其将接受这笔资金，但该州保留对美国政府所设条件提出质疑的权利。根据事态的发展，该州可能会推迟或取消宽带拨款的分发计划。美国国家电信和信息管理局（NTIA）去年决定，各州必须同意不对从 420 亿美元的“宽带公平、接入和部署”（BEAD）计划中获得资金的互联网服务提供商（ISP）执行任何费率监管或网络中立性规则。

California had to decide whether to accept its share of the fund despite that restriction. California is slated to spend $1.42 billion to deploy broadband to 270,571 locations, and may ultimately receive up to $1.86 billion from BEAD for a mix of deployment and non-deployment projects. State officials argue that California should be able to obtain the money and keep enforcing its laws because the Trump administration’s demand would violate the state’s constitutional rights.

加州必须决定是否在这一限制条件下接受其份额的资金。加州计划投入 14.2 亿美元为 270,571 个地点部署宽带，并最终可能从 BEAD 获得高达 18.6 亿美元的资金，用于部署和非部署项目的组合。州政府官员认为，加州应该能够获得这笔资金并继续执行其法律，因为特朗普政府的要求将侵犯该州的宪法权利。

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) made its view clear in a carefully worded letter yesterday to Assistant Secretary of Commerce and NTIA Administrator Arielle Roth. “The CPUC cannot be bound by any terms or conditions that are unconstitutional or not authorized by law and it expressly does not waive or concede any arguments or challenges concerning the legality, interpretation, or applicability of any term or condition,” CPUC President John Reynolds told Roth.

加州公用事业委员会（CPUC）昨日在致商务部助理部长兼 NTIA 局长 Arielle Roth 的一封措辞严谨的信中明确表达了其观点。CPUC 主席 John Reynolds 在信中告诉 Roth：“CPUC 不受任何违宪或未经法律授权的条款或条件的约束，并且明确表示不放弃或承认任何关于任何条款或条件的合法性、解释或适用性的论点或质疑。”

Reynolds’ letter also said the CPUC cannot prevent other California agencies from enforcing state laws, suggesting that the attorney general would maintain the right to punish misbehaving Internet providers. California fighting “preposterous demand” Reynolds’ letter acknowledged that the NTIA may not agree with the CPUC’s stance and said the state thus will not distribute any funding to ISPs until after the state and federal agency sort out any differences.

Reynolds 的信还表示，CPUC 无法阻止加州其他机构执行州法律，这暗示总检察长将保留惩罚违规互联网服务提供商的权利。在加州对抗“荒谬要求”方面，Reynolds 的信承认 NTIA 可能不同意 CPUC 的立场，并表示在州政府与联邦机构解决分歧之前，该州不会向互联网服务提供商分发任何资金。

If the NTIA refuses to change its position, California could sue the Trump administration on the grounds that the condition is unconstitutional. The NTIA does not appear likely to bend. “As noted in the Department’s response to CPUC, the terms and conditions of the award constitute the entire agreement between NTIA and CPUC. No part of the letter outlining CPUC’s concerns is incorporated into or made part of the award,” an NTIA spokesperson told Ars today.

如果 NTIA 拒绝改变立场，加州可能会以该条件违宪为由起诉特朗普政府。NTIA 似乎不太可能妥协。一位 NTIA 发言人今日告诉 Ars：“正如商务部在给 CPUC 的回复中所述，奖励条款和条件构成了 NTIA 与 CPUC 之间的完整协议。信中概述 CPUC 担忧的任何部分均未被纳入或成为奖励的一部分。”

Consumer advocacy group Public Knowledge supported CPUC’s position. The Trump administration’s demand to preempt state laws is “brazen and meritless,” the group said. “This administration’s preposterous demand that industry be given a blanket waiver from affordability requirements, net neutrality and privacy protections, and any other commitments to connect and serve Americans has no basis in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), which established BEAD.

消费者权益保护组织 Public Knowledge 支持 CPUC 的立场。该组织称，特朗普政府要求优先于州法律的做法是“厚颜无耻且毫无根据的”。Public Knowledge 的高级政策顾问 Raza Panjwani 表示：“本届政府要求给予行业豁免权，使其无需遵守负担能力要求、网络中立性和隐私保护，以及其他连接和服务美国人的承诺，这种荒谬的要求在建立 BEAD 的《基础设施投资和就业法案》（IIJA）中毫无依据。”

And, as the commission points out, the NTIA has no authority to alter California state law or require California agencies to not enforce the law,” said Raza Panjwani, senior policy counsel at Public Knowledge. The CPUC voted to ratify the funding plan in September. But Reynolds said in yesterday’s letter to the Trump administration that his agency’s acceptance of the funds is “based on the CPUC’s best understanding of the effect of Section 50” of the BEAD terms and conditions.

“正如委员会所指出的，NTIA 无权修改加州州法，也无权要求加州机构不执行法律，”Panjwani 说道。CPUC 于 9 月投票批准了该资金计划。但 Reynolds 在昨日致特朗普政府的信中表示，其机构接受这笔资金是“基于 CPUC 对 BEAD 条款和条件中第 50 条效力的最佳理解”。

Section 50 of the BEAD rules says each state: shall commit that it will not enforce any law, regulation, order, contracting requirement, or other enforceable obligation that directly or indirectly regulates the rates, terms, and conditions of broadband Internet service… or imposes net neutrality rules, open access, or other utility-style rules on broadband Internet service, against a Subgrantee or its affiliates anywhere it provides service within the State (i.e., both BEAD and non-BEAD locations), while that Subgrantee has any subgrant that is still within its period of performance, extended period of performance, or federal interest period.

BEAD 规则第 50 条规定，各州必须承诺：不得针对次级受赠人或其关联方在州内提供服务的任何地点（即 BEAD 和非 BEAD 地点）执行任何直接或间接监管宽带互联网服务的费率、条款和条件的法律、法规、命令、合同要求或其他可执行义务，也不得施加网络中立性规则、开放接入或其他公用事业风格的规则，只要该次级受赠人拥有仍处于履约期、延长履约期或联邦利益期内的任何次级拨款。

The BEAD rules specify that a net neutrality rule is one prohibiting ISPs from “blocking content, throttling speeds, imposing data caps, or engaging in paid prioritization.” ISPs obtaining BEAD funding could be exempt from such laws for up to 14 years. California calls US rule “vague and ambiguous” Reynolds’ letter said the NTIA-imposed condition is “vague and ambiguous as to its scope and its relationship to Section 47 U.S.C. § 1702(g)(2)(A)(i) of the BEAD statute,” the US law that created the BEAD program.

BEAD 规则明确规定，网络中立性规则是指禁止互联网服务提供商“屏蔽内容、限制速度、施加数据上限或进行付费优先处理”的规则。获得 BEAD 资金的互联网服务提供商可能在长达 14 年的时间内免受此类法律的约束。加州称美国规则“模糊且含糊不清”。Reynolds 的信中表示，NTIA 施加的条件“在其范围以及与 BEAD 法案（即创建 BEAD 计划的美国法律）第 47 U.S.C. § 1702(g)(2)(A)(i) 条的关系方面是模糊且含糊不清的”。

He wrote: The CPUC does not interpret Section 50 to require the CPUC to waive, release, or otherwise forfeit any rights, claims, arguments, or defenses concerning potential implications of Section 50 that may violate applicable laws. Further, the CPUC’s acceptance of funds under this award should not be understood as agreement either to refrain from compliance with mandatory legal duties or obligations, or to constrain other State of California entities in the exercise of their authorities to enforce state law, which is outside the scope of the CPUC’s authority.

他写道：CPUC 并不将第 50 条解释为要求 CPUC 放弃、解除或以其他方式丧失任何关于第 50 条可能违反适用法律的潜在影响的权利、主张、论点或辩护。此外，CPUC 接受此项奖励下的资金不应被理解为同意不遵守强制性法律职责或义务，也不应被理解为限制加州其他实体行使其执行州法律的权力，这超出了 CPUC 的职权范围。

Moreover, California’s net neutrality law expressly provides that “any waiver of the provisions of this title is contrary to public policy and shall be unenforceable and void.” Likewise, many of the CPUC’s own programs that touch on broadband Internet access service are mandated by the California Public Utilities Code, and are neither discret

此外，加州的网络中立性法律明确规定，“对本标题条款的任何放弃均违反公共政策，且不可执行且无效。”同样，CPUC 自身涉及宽带互联网接入服务的许多项目均由《加州公用事业法典》强制规定，既非酌情决定。