DC Circuit Questions AT&T Attorney More Than FCC's About Telco Voice USF Challenge
Federal judges questioned AT&T more extensively than the FCC about the company's challenge to partial telecom forbearance orders that left ILECs subject to unsubsidized USF voice service obligations. At oral argument (audio) Thursday in AT&T v. FCC., No. 15-1038, AT&T…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
counsel Benjamin Softness of Kellogg Huber was subjected to questioning for 22 minutes by the three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, while the FCC attorney only had 11 minutes (both had been allotted 15 minutes). Chief Judge Merrick Garland disputed AT&T arguments that were based on census block data the company didn't submit before the agency's decisions, and that the FCC carried a particular evidentiary burden cited by the company. AT&T noted afterward it's appealing two FCC orders concerning eligible telecom carrier obligations and designations, with CenturyLink joining as a petitioner and USTelecom as an intervenor. "Compelling providers to provide service in costly-to-serve areas while refusing to provide them with high-cost universal service support violates the Communications Act’s statutory command that the FCC provide 'sufficient' support," emailed AT&T. "These unfunded mandates cause carriers like AT&T to divert capital dollars to maintain [plain old telephone service], a service that few consumers want, instead of using their capital to expand broadband service." The FCC declined comment.