Monday marks the end of net neutrality rules in the U.S., following GOP members of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voting to end the protections last year.

The FCC announced the June 11 end date in May after the organization voted 3-2 along party lines last December to roll back the 2015 Open Internet Order.

The end of the protections comes even as Democrats and protestors press forward with their calls for an open internet.

ADVERTISEMENT

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai has argued the commission went beyond its authority when it imposed the net neutrality regulations.

Those in favor of net neutrality argue that scrapping the rules gives major internet companies like Comcast or Verizon the ability to hike up the cost of internet use and limit access online.

The Senate voted last month to restore the net neutrality protections, but the bill is unlikely to pass the Republican-controlled House.

States have also started to create their own net neutrality rules. However, the FCC included a measure in its repeal order that blocks states from creating their own rules, laying the groundwork for legal battles over the open internet laws.</s>The rules governing net neutrality may be dead, but the chatter over how to ensure an open internet is livelier than ever.

After months of votes and procedural and bureaucratic moves, the Federal Communication Commission's decision to end the Obama-era laws governing net neutrality went into effect on Monday.

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, who marked the occasion with an op-ed about the open internet on CNET, defended the move as necessary to remove what he has described as onerous regulations that restrict investment in new networks. Critics, however, argue that the demise of the rules strips away all authority by the FCC and leaves internet service providers to police themselves.

The FCC's rollback has the potential to change how the internet works -- down the line. ISPs are technically free to prioritize traffic and offer more expensive high-speed lanes connecting businesses to consumers, although it's unlikely to happen right away.

From the Twitter-sphere to Washington, a lot of people are talking about net neutrality. Here's a round-up of notable comments (comments are edited for length):

Senator Edward J. Markey, a Democrat from Massachusetts:

"The repeal of net neutrality officially goes into effect today, but the fight is far from over. The people saying we can't pass the resolution to #savetheinternet in the House are the same people who were saying we couldn't do it in the Senate. Ignore them. Just keep fighting.

There will be no eulogy today for net neutrality. The FCC will not have the last word when it comes to net neutrality, the American people will. The fight to restore net neutrality rules has new urgency today and moving forward as we continue to work in the House of Representatives to repeal the FCC's terrible decision."

FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel (Democrat):

"Last year, I voted against the FCC's decision to roll back our net neutrality rules. Today, the FCC's misguided repeal of net neutrality goes into effect. This is bad news for all of us who rely on an open internet for so many facets of civic and commercial life.

Plain and simple, thanks to the FCC's rollback of net neutrality, internet providers have the legal green light, the technical ability, and business incentive to discriminate and manipulate what we see, read, and learn online.

If the arc of history is long, we are going to bend this toward a more just outcome. The momentum around the country — from small towns to big cities, from state houses to court houses, from governors' executive actions to action in Congress — is proof the American people are not done fighting for an open internet."

Senator Chuck Schumer, a Democrat from New York:

"By refusing to bring up the Senate-passed resolution to restore net neutrality, which passed the Senate by a powerful bipartisan vote, House Republican leaders gave a green light to the big ISPs to charge middle-class Americans, small business owners, schools, rural Americans, and communities of color more to use the internet. That's exactly why the entire Senate Democratic caucus sent a letter last week urging Speaker Ryan to schedule a vote immediately to save the internet."

"It's now as clear as day to every American that — with the exception of three Republicans in the Senate — their Republican representatives in the Congress chose to protect special interests and the biggest corporates over middle-class families, average consumers, entrepreneurs and anyone who relies on the free and open internet. Every Republican who opposed this vote will own any and all of the damaging consequences of the FCC's horribly misguided decision."

Josh Shapiro, Pennsylvania's attorney general, tweeted:

"As of today, net neutrality is dead. I've filed suit to protect an open internet and will continue the fight. We need an internet where we can watch, read, and share freely."

Michael Beckerman, CEO of the Internet Association:

"The internet industry remains committed to restoring net neutrality protections through the courts, legislation, and administrative action. Americans in every state and across the political spectrum support rules that ban ISPs from blocking, throttling, and prioritizing web traffic. IA and our member companies remain outcome-oriented and will continue to advocate for protections that allow Americans to access the entire internet, not a version curated by ISPs."

The ACLU tweeted:

"#NetNeutrality protections end today but that isn't slowing us down from fighting back. Take action to demand your representative save the internet."

Gigi Sohn, an adviser to former FCC Tom Wheeler who helped craft the 2015 Open Internet Rules:

"The end of the 2015 net neutrality rules and the legal authority on which they are based will allow companies like Comcast, AT&T and Verizon to take control of consumers' Internet experience and favor or disfavor websites, programming services and applications at will. Equally as important, should consumers or innovators have a complaint about fraudulent, discriminatory, privacy violating or predatory pricing practices of broadband ISPs, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) won't answer their call. For the first time since the creation of broadband, the agency will not take responsibility for protecting consumers or competition.

If, as some expect, a federal judge allows AT&T and Time Warner to merge, consumers should expect to see the first chapter in the "cable-ization" of the Internet. This FCC has already given AT&T permission to favor its DirecTV programming on its mobile broadband service. Expect that AT&T will also favor HBO, TNT, CNN and other Time Warner properties. Just like a cable company, AT&T and its broadband brethren will be able to pick and choose winners over the Internet."

Evan Greer, deputy director of digital rights advocacy group Fight for the Future:

"Hold the obituaries. net neutrality is not dead. Ajit Pai's absurd repeal of basic free speech protections is the most unpopular decision in the history of the FCC, and it will not stand. The Senate already passed a historic bipartisan resolution disapproving the repeal. Now the entire Internet is laser focused on getting the House of Representatives to do the same."

Matt Wood, director of consumer advocacy group Free Press:

"Ajit Pai and the ISPs that give him his marching orders will undoubtedly be pleased today as this decision to rob internet users' of their rights takes effect. We are confident that their happiness will be short-lived, as Congress wakes up to the overwhelming public support for the Net Neutrality rules we've lost, and as the courts move closer to reviewing Pai's unlawful decision.

"Pai and his colleagues will celebrate a temporary victory on Monday. They will repeat the same propaganda used to justify their ill-advised vote in the first place. They'll claim that the rules dampened broadband investment — even though Free Press and others have proven broadband deployment, speeds and performance continued to improve with the rules in place.

Proponents of less regulation on an open internet

Joan Marsh, AT&T's executive vice president of regulatory and state external affairs, wrote:

"As the FCC's open internet order takes effect today, two things will remain unchanged. First, the internet will continue to function just as it did yesterday, empowering this generation and those that follow with robust access to information, entertainment and, most importantly, to each other. Second, our commitment to an open internet will not waiver, just as our customers expect and deserve.

"In January, our Chairman published an open letter reiterating that commitment to support internet freedom on our network and calling for an Internet Bill of Rights that guarantees consumer protections applicable to all internet companies. If that sounds as good to you as it does to us, we hope you'll join us in working towards permanent and bipartisan legislation that will ensure consistent rules of the road for all companies and across all websites."

Dave Watson, CEO of Comcast Cable, wrote in a blog post:

"I want to make sure our customers have the facts about their Internet service with all the recent news about an open Internet and net neutrality. Nothing about Comcast's broadband service changes as the FCC's recent net neutrality order goes into effect today. Your Comcast service isn't different today. And it won't be different tomorrow.

We still don't and won't block, throttle or discriminate against lawful content. We're still not creating fast lanes. We still don't have plans to enter into any so-called paid prioritization agreements.

What do these regulatory changes mean for our customers? These commitments are legally enforceable by the Federal Trade Commission — so they aren't 'voluntary' commitments. They are binding commitments that can and should be enforced by regulatory authorities.

Comcast has long supported principles of net neutrality. We strongly supported the FCC's first set of rules on these issues way back on 2010. Unfortunately, the past eight years have seen regulatory ping pong and endless court cases on these issues. We continue to believe the best way to ensure lasting net neutrality rules that protect consumers and promote investment is for Congress to enact legislation."

Verizon:

"We still strong open internet rules. For us, nothing has changed."

Doug Brake, director of broadband and spectrum policy for think tank Information Technology and Innovation Foundation:

"The Obama Administration's net neutrality rules, grounded in Title II of the Communications Act, put the United States on the path of regulating broadband like an unchanging public utility. It is time to put the Title II chapter in the net neutrality saga behind us.

"Chairman Pai's efforts return broadband to a regulatory environment better suited to encouraging an innovative, evolving communications platform. The Chicken Littles claiming 'the end of the Internet' will now be proved wrong. However, there is still much to be done to achieve a stable, lasting legal framework that gives everyone in the Internet ecosystem confidence to invest in and use this crucial technology. Now is the time for policymakers to work toward bipartisan compromise legislation that will stand the test of time."

The Internet & Television Association, the cable industry's lobbying group, wrote:

"June 11, 2018 is the day that the internet returns to the light-touch regulations that marked most of its history and gave rise to its tremendous growth.

What consumers will notice today, tomorrow, next month, next year or pick your date, is quite literally — nothing. Nothing, that is, other than the same high-speed internet access service that lets consumers decide what they read, what they say, what they create, what they watch, and what they listen to over the internet. This is because whether governed by one set of rules or another, an open Internet with the core principals of net neutrality at its foundation is baked into the internet experience. Consumers expect it and deserve it.

That is also why we are confident that despite a new round of outlandish claims and doomsday predictions from groups dedicated to stoking political controversy, consumers will be able to see for themselves that their internet service will keep working as always has and will keep getting better."

Blockchain Decoded: CNET looks at the tech powering bitcoin -- and soon, too, a myriad of services that will change your life.

CNET Magazine: Check out a sample of the stories in CNET's newsstand edition.</s>What Net Neutrality Means to You</s>The way the internet is regulated in the US has changed.

The controversial repeal of Obama-era net neutrality protections took effect Monday, despite ongoing efforts from members of Congress, state officials, tech companies and advocacy groups to save the rules.

The Republican-led Federal Communications Commission voted along party lines in December to repeal the rules, which were intended to prevent internet providers from blocking, speeding up, or slowing down access to specific online services.

The order required the approval of the Office of Management and Budget, which the FCC announced receiving last month. In a statement at the time, FCC chairman Ajit Pai framed the upcoming repeal as removing burdensome regulations.

“Now, on June 11, these unnecessary and harmful internet regulations will be repealed and the bipartisan, light-touch approach that served the online world well for nearly 20 years will be restored,” Pai said in a statement last month.

An FCC spokesperson confirmed to CNN this week that the timetable is proceeding as previously announced.

“June 11 is significant because it will be the first time in the over 15 year battle over net neutrality that the FCC will have essentially no role in preserving an open Internet and overseeing the broadband market,” Gigi Sohn, a counselor to former FCC chairman Tom Wheeler and a staunch supporter of net neutrality, told CNNMoney.

The concern among net neutrality advocates is that the repeal could give internet providers too much control over how online content is delivered. It may also make it harder for the next generation of online services to compete if they have to pay up to be placed in a so-called internet fast lane.

“Those ‘fast lanes’ will put those who won’t or cannot pay in the slow lane, making the internet look a lot like cable TV,” Sohn says.

But even those who oppose the repeal say very little is likely to change right away given pending litigation and possible legislation to settle the issue.

“Nothing will change the next day,” says Kevin Werbach, an associate professor of legal studies at Wharton and former FCC adviser. “Companies are not going to take any major action to change their policies until it’s resolved.”

Last month, the Senate passed a measure to preserve the net neutrality rules. On Thursday, with the official repeal date looming, dozens of senators sent a letter to House Speaker Paul Ryan urging him to schedule a vote on the issue.

A collection of advocacy groups has called for “mass online actions” on June 11 to once again call attention to the issue and pressure Congress to act.

“It’s an uphill fight,” says Chris Lewis, VP of Public Knowledge, a tech advocacy group that has urged the House to take action. The Republican-led House, and President Trump, are both thought to be unlikely to back the Senate’s measure.

More than 20 states have filed a lawsuit to stop the net neutrality repeal. Several states, including New Jersey, Washington, Oregon and California, have gone so far as to push legislation to enforce the principles of net neutrality within their borders.

This local legislation could lead to a legal showdown, however.

A spokeswoman for the FCC previously directed CNNMoney to a section of the final order for net neutrality, in which the FCC asserts authority to prevent states from pursuing laws inconsistent with the net neutrality repeal.

“It’s patently illegal for the states to make their own internet policy,” Roslyn Layton, a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute who served on President Trump’s transition team for the FCC, told CNNMoney last month.

The general uncertainty around the future of net neutrality is likely to extend through much of this year, according to those pushing for legislation and litigation, if not longer.

“We’ll see what happens after the [midterm] election,” Lewis says.</s>Despite votes in Congress and efforts from advocacy groups, net neutrality officially ended Monday.

Back in December, the Federal Communications Commission repealed net neutrality regulations, which prevent internet service companies from charging users more to see certain content.

The Senate voted to block the repeal back in May, and passed a measure to restore net neutrality. However, this measure has yet to make it through the House of Representatives. In fact, the measure to restore net neutrality is not expected to pass in the House, or be signed by President Donald Trump.

And now, the rollback has officially gone into effect.

From the beginning, real estate advocacy groups and companies have opposed the rollback, saying the changes to net neutrality create an unlevel playing field for small business owners.

Real estate experts such as Zillow, Redfin and the National Association of Realtors stood against the rollback.

Back in May, when the Senate voted to block the rollback, Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, tweeted that many Ohio members of NAR joined together to witness the vote.

Several states, about 29, are now considering legislation to implement their own form of net neutrality. However, at a national level, net neutrality is dead.

“The business of real estate is increasingly conducted online, and NAR has concerns the FCC’s decision to roll back net neutrality could negatively impact the way consumers search for homes or how real estate is transacted,” NAR President Elizabeth Mendenhall said.

“With the net neutrality decision finalized today, NAR urges Congress and the FCC to work to ensure the Internet remains a fair and open platform, in which our 1.3 million members can freely share lawful content on the internet,” Mendenhall said.</s>Proponents of net neutrality protest against Federal Communication Commission Chairman Ajit Pai outside the American Enterprise Institute before his arrival May 5, 2017 in Washington, DC. Pai, appointed to the FCC by President Obama in 2012, became chairman in January when President Trump appointed him. Pai initiated a process to overturn net neutrality rules passed two years ago by the FCC. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images) ORG XMIT: 700044890 ORIG FILE ID: 679317438

Net neutrality is officially a thing of the past. A new set of rules at the Federal Communications Commission went into effect Monday, ending consumer protections that assure equal legal broadband access that doesn't slow or block certain sources. Some consumers fear a slower Internet and higher costs for broadband delivery.

The FCC changes were passed last December, shepherded by Trump-appointed FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, who says the new lighter-touch rules are more market-friendly than the "utility-style regulation" in the Obama-era.

"Monday, we are ending this flawed approach and allowing smaller internet service providers to focus their efforts on deploying more broadband, connecting more Americans with digital opportunity, and offering more competition in the marketplace," Pai wrote in a column for CNET published Sunday.

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Ajit Pai takes a drink from a mug during an FCC meeting where the FCC will vote on net neutrality, Dec. 14, 2017, in Washington.

Under the new law, ISPs are required to disclose any blocking, throttling or prioritization of their own content or from their partners on customers' broadband connections.

Providers have said they won't block or throttle legal websites, but have left open the potential for charging more for transport of some data.

Supporters of net neutrality argue that ISPs should deliver access to online content and apps equally, and prefer rules the FCC passed in 2015. Those Obama-era rules prevented ISPs from blocking or slowing legal traffic, or from being paid for prioritized, faster delivery.

Since Pai's passage of the Restoring Internet Freedom order, supporters of net neutrality have taken several approaches to prevent the new rules from going into effect. More than 20 states have sued the FCC, and several governors have passed executive orders requiring ISPs doing business with their states to uphold net neutrality.

Some Congressional Democrats are seeking a repeal of their own, the overturning of the 2017 order that ends the 2015 rules. The Senate last month passed a Congressional Review Act measure 52-47 aiming to overturn the 2017 measure (the CRA is a quick way to overturn newly-passed regulations within 60 legislative days of passage).

But a battle for votes in the House remains. Nearly 50 more House lawmakers must sign a discharge petition introduced by Congressman Mike Doyle in order to force a vote.

Rep. Mike Doyle, D-Pa., center, accompanied by Senate Minority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer of N.Y., left, and Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., right, speaks at a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, May 16, 2018, after the Senate passes a resolution to reverse the FCC decision to end net neutrality.

Currently, 170 House lawmakers have signed that petition. If the House votes on and passes the bill before the end of this session, the measure would be sent to President Trump. His approval would be highly unlikely since Trump had called the Obama-era rules a "power grab."

Still, supporters have hoped to force a public vote on the issue, because with midterm elections looming some lawmakers might be swayed as net neutrality is a resonant issue with voters.

More: Senate votes for net neutrality return, but major hurdles remain

More: It's finally happening: Net neutrality rules that sparked intense debate to end next month</s>Along with allowing ISPs to more deeply affect what content you see and the speed with which you can access it, the new rules also shift oversight away from the FCC and over to the FTC. Under Chairman Tom Wheeler, the FCC classified broadband internet as a Title II service, putting it in line with utilities like telephone service and electricity. But in December, the FCC switched broadband back to a Title I classification, giving the FTC some of the regulatory authority the FCC previously had over ISPs and negating the legal authority the FCC had to ban practices like blocking, throttling and paid prioritization. Chairman Ajit Pai has said the previous setup was "heavy-handed" and that this newer "light touch" approach will spur more investment and innovation.

There are many outspoken opponents of the FCC's move, though, including state governments, tech companies, rights groups and attorneys general. At least 29 states have introduced more than 65 bills aimed at protecting net neutrality and seven states -- Hawaii, New Jersey, New York, Montana, Rhode Island, Oregon and Vermont -- enacted executive orders that made it illegal for state agencies to enter contracts with ISPs that don't uphold net neutrality. So far, Oregon, Vermont and Washington have passed net neutrality legislation and California's Senate passed a net neutrality bill last month. Additionally, 22 states' and Washington DC's attorneys general have filed a lawsuit alongside nearly a dozen other groups, challenging the FCC decision.

As for Congress, the Senate issued a vote to overturn the decision in May and the House of Representatives now has the opportunity to do the same. As of now, 171 Representatives have agreed to vote against the FCC decision, 47 short of the 218 needed for that vote to be successful. If House net neutrality supporters can get those last votes, which is unlikely, the decision would still need to be signed by President Trump who is expected to veto it if it ever came to that.

So net neutrality's path through Congress is an uphill battle, but some are still optimistic that net neutrality will win out in the end. "Hold the obituaries. Net neutrality is not dead," Fight for the Future Deputy Director Evan Greer said in a statement. "Ajit Pai's absurd repeal of basic free speech protections is the most unpopular decision in the history of the FCC, and it will not stand. The Senate already passed a historic bipartisan resolution disapproving the repeal. Now the entire internet is laser focused on getting the House of Representatives to do the same."

Even if the vote doesn't make it through the House, these efforts are forcing politicians to publicly choose a side on the matter, decisions that could affect how successful their reelection campaigns are in the future. "The internet is coming for net neutrality," said Greer. "There is nowhere to hide. Any lawmaker, of any party, that fails to sign the discharge petition in support of the CRA will regret it come election time."

And while a new administration in 2020 could, in theory, return the rules back to what they were, a more permanent decision still lies with Congress. How deeply future legislation might protect net neutrality will largely depend on which representatives are writing and voting on it, which means upcoming elections are very important for the fate of net neutrality. If you're interested in letting your representatives know where you stand on net neutrality and how you'd like them to vote, you can see a tally of who has and hasn't agreed to support net neutrality here.</s>Multiple lawsuits and protests are expected to follow.

Net neutrality protections, first put in place during the Obama administration, will end on June 11. Ever since the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted in December to rescind the rules, members of Congress, tech companies, and numerous advocacy groups have fought without success to keep net neutrality in place.

Net neutrality rules were enacted to keep internet providers from blocking certain websites and changing the speed of access to some content. The idea was to keep the internet open and uncensored.

Last month, FCC chairman Ajit Pai said the retraction of net neutrality rules was needed to remove needless and onerous regulations.

“Now, on June 11, these unnecessary and harmful internet regulations will be repealed and the bipartisan, light-touch approach that served the online world well for nearly 20 years will be restored,” said Pai, per a CNN report.

According to a statement from the FCC, the agency is on track to remove the rules as planned. Last month, the FCC received the required approval from the Office of Management and Budget in order to keep with the June 11 schedule.

Advocates of net neutrality fear without the rules in place, internet providers will have too much control over web content. New online services will have a hard time competing if they have to pay to be in the “fast lane.”

“Those ‘fast lanes’ will put those who won’t or cannot pay in the slow lane, making the internet look a lot like cable TV,” said Gigi Sohn, a former counselor for the FCC.

In May, a bill was approved in the Senate to save net neutrality rules. However, the bill has yet to be voted on in the House. With the June 11 date approaching, several senators asked House Speaker Paul Ryan to schedule a vote on the issue.

While it seems inevitable that net neutrality will end tomorrow, not much will likely happen at first. Lawsuits and “mass online actions” will slow the pace of any changes as companies will want to see how it all plays out.

Over 20 states have joined the fight by banning together in a lawsuit to reverse the net neutrality repeal. Some states, like New Jersey, Washington, and California, have been actively working on state laws that would keep net neutrality alive within their jurisdictions. Per a report from Slate, governors in both New York and Montana have signed executive orders to keep net neutrality in place.

Ultimately, the FCC said these lawsuits and executive orders will not stop the repeal of the rules. Per the net neutrality order, states cannot enact any legislation that attempts to circumvent the repeal. In addition, states cannot “make their own internet policy” under current federal law.</s>Net neutrality is officially a thing of the past. A new set of rules at the Federal Communications Commission went into effect Monday, ending consumer protections that assure equal legal broadband access that doesn't slow or block certain sources. Some consumers fear a slower Internet and higher costs for broadband delivery.

The FCC changes were passed last December, shepherded by Trump-appointed FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, who says the new lighter-touch rules are more market-friendly than the "utility-style regulation" in the Obama-era.

"Monday, we are ending this flawed approach and allowing smaller internet service providers to focus their efforts on deploying more broadband, connecting more Americans with digital opportunity, and offering more competition in the marketplace," Pai wrote in a column for CNET published Sunday.

Under the new law, ISPs are required to disclose any blocking, throttling or prioritization of their own content or from their partners on customers' broadband connections.

Providers have said they won't block or throttle legal websites, but have left open the potential for charging more for transport of some data.

Supporters of net neutrality argue that ISPs should deliver access to online content and apps equally, and prefer rules the FCC passed in 2015. Those Obama-era rules prevented ISPs from blocking or slowing legal traffic, or from being paid for prioritized, faster delivery.

Since Pai's passage of the Restoring Internet Freedom order, supporters of net neutrality have taken several approaches to prevent the new rules from going into effect. More than 20 states have sued the FCC, and several governors have passed executive orders requiring ISPs doing business with their states to uphold net neutrality.

Some Congressional Democrats are seeking a repeal of their own, the overturning of the 2017 order that ends the 2015 rules. The Senate last month passed a Congressional Review Act measure 52-47 aiming to overturn the 2017 measure (the CRA is a quick way to overturn newly-passed regulations within 60 legislative days of passage).

But a battle for votes in the House remains. Nearly 50 more House lawmakers must sign a discharge petition introduced by Congressman Mike Doyle in order to force a vote.

Currently, 170 House lawmakers have signed that petition. If the House votes on and passes the bill before the end of this session, the measure would be sent to President Trump. His approval would be highly unlikely since Trump had called the Obama-era rules a "power grab."

Still, supporters have hoped to force a public vote on the issue, because with midterm elections looming some lawmakers might be swayed as net neutrality is a resonant issue with voters.

More: Senate votes for net neutrality return, but major hurdles remain

More: It's finally happening: Net neutrality rules that sparked intense debate to end next month</s>Today the Federal Communications Commission's rules barring internet providers from blocking or slowing content, or giving special treatment to certain content, were wiped off the books, following an FCC vote last December. But don't expect to see huge changes right away.

First, there are still some rules constraining broadband providers. Several states, including New York and Washington, have passed regulations that ban or discourage internet providers from favoring certain content based on payments from content providers. Comcast, the nation's largest broadband provider, is temporarily forbidden from violating net neutrality under the terms of the government's approval of its 2011 acquisition of NBC Universal; that restriction expires in September. Charter, the second-largest home broadband provider, is required to uphold net neutrality until 2023 under the terms of its acquisition of Time Warner Cable in 2016.

Meanwhile, most major internet providers have promised not to block, throttle, or discriminate against legal content. But net neutrality activists don't want to take the companies at their word. They’re fighting to block the FCC's December decision in both Congress and the courts while also working to pass new state laws.

The most immediate battle to save net neutrality is legislation that would effectively force the FCC to bring back the rules the FCC approved in 2015. Under the Congressional Review Act, or CRA, Congress, with the approval of the president, can not only reject regulations issued by a federal agency but effectively bar that agency from taking similar action again.

Legislation overturning the FCC's December decision passed the Senate in May with three Republicans and all Democrats and independents voting in favor. The next step would be a vote in the House, where it needs more than 20 Republicans to support it before the end of the year.

US Representative Mike Doyle (D-Pennsylvania), who introduced the legislation in the House, filed a petition last month that would force a vote if a majority of House members sign it. That’s a tall order; to date, 170 members have signed. But it might be doable, given the bipartisan support for net neutrality. A recent Morning Consult poll found that 60 percent of registered voters, including 63 percent of Republicans, support the idea of net neutrality. An earlier poll by the Program for Public Consultation at the University of Maryland, which attempted to explain both sides of the issue to respondents, found that 83 percent favored keeping the FCC's net neutrality rules, including 75 percent of Republicans.

Former FCC lawyer Gigi Sohn points out that last year when Republicans used the CRA to kill Obama-era internet privacy rules, 15 House Republicans crossed the aisle to vote with Democrats to save the protections. Sohn argues that more Republicans could have been persuaded to vote against the legislation if there had been more time. And activists have won against long odds before. For example, in 2012 public pressure persuaded Congress to kill an intellectual property bill known as SOPA/PIPA.

Even if the measure passes the House, it will need to be signed by the president, who hasn't been supportive of net neutrality in the past. But Free Press policy director Matt Wood points out that the administration is unpredictable and has embraced more populist policies at times, such as its opposition to AT&T's proposed acquisition of Time Warner.

The CRA isn’t the only attempt in Congress to address net neutrality. Last year, Representative Marsha Blackburn (R-Tennessee), a long-time critic of net neutrality, proposed a bill that would ban internet service providers from blocking content, while allowing “fast lanes.” It would also ban states from passing their own net neutrality laws and limit the FCC’s authority over broadband. Last month, during the Senate’s debate over the CRA, Senator John Thune (R-South Dakota) said he would reintroduce a similar bill he first introduced in 2015 that bans paid prioritization, but likewise limits the FCC’s role in overseeing broadband. Neither bill covers broadband providers’ use of data caps or the obscure but important behind-the-scenes deals they make with each other. Net neutrality advocates have generally seen both bills as inadequate or even harmful. “At the end of the day this bill is a cynical attempt to distract GOP lawmakers who are considering voting for the CRA to restore MUCH stronger, REAL #NetNeutrality protections,” the group Fight for the Future tweeted last month about Thune’s proposal.

Some state governments, meanwhile, aren't waiting for Congress. Washington became the first state to pass net neutrality protections in March. Last month, the California state senate passed a net neutrality bill that would actually offer stronger protections than the Obama-era FCC rules. The bill is now awaiting a vote by the California Assembly before moving on to Governor Jerry Brown. New York state lawmakers are considering a similar bill. If both bills pass, that would give 17 percent of the country stricter protections than they enjoyed under the Obama-era rules.

New York is also among the several states that have taken a more indirect approach to ensuring net neutrality. In January, Governor Andrew Cuomo signed an executive order that banned state agencies from doing business with internet providers that don't agree to uphold net neutrality. The governors of Montana, New Jersey, Hawaii, and Vermont have signed similar orders, and Oregon passed a similar state law.

Broadband providers claim that these state-level rules would burden them with a "patchwork" of rules. The telecommunications industry group US Telecom has vowed to challenge state rules in court. That could come to a head soon, because the FCC order taking effect to revoke the Obama-era rules also bans states from passing their own laws. Legal experts are unsure whether that ban will hold up in court. Marc Martin, a former FCC staffer who is chair of law firm Perkins Coie's communications practice, told WIRED earlier this year that while it's not clear if state level protections such as those in Washington will withstand legal challenge, the executive orders are on more solid footing because states have broad authority to choose how they spend their budgets. "I wonder if anyone will even fight it," Martin says.

Perhaps the biggest cloud of uncertainty is whether the FCC could legally repeal the Obama-era rules. A law called the Administrative Procedure Act bans federal agencies from making "arbitrary or capricious" decisions. Net neutrality advocates have sued the FCC in federal court, arguing that voting to revoke them less than three years after they were passed in early 2015 is capricious.

The lawsuit was initially filed by several state attorneys general, and was joined by advocacy groups, industry groups, and by companies including Etsy and Kickstarter. But a timeline for the case has yet to be approved, says Wood of Free Press, one of the organizations involved in the suit. It will take months for the two sides to file briefs and responses. It's possible that a court will reach a decision by early 2019, but it could easily be at least a year from now before a decision is reached, Wood says.

While Congress can block the FCC from trying to revoke net neutrality laws again, the outcome of the court case will be less final. If the FCC loses the case, the agency would be free to try again to dismantle net neutrality. And if the FCC wins, it could actually make it easier for Democrats to restore net neutrality rules the next time the party controls the White House.

That means regardless of what happens in court, the fight is far from over.
• Photo essay: You've never seen waves like this before
• The real reason Google Search labeled the California GOP as Nazis
• This list of the best Bluetooth speakers goes to 11
• Looking for more? Sign up for our daily newsletter and never miss our latest and greatest stories
The 2015 net neutrality rules in the United States end.