"The Buck Stops at the FCC"-(Net Neutrality)

[merrily]

25. On this thread, anyway, I used Wu not so much because of his claim of

broken promise, but for his resounding expertise in the area. I posit that he would not have accused Obama (or anyone) of a broken promise if the Court's January 2014 Opinon had really been fatal to net neutrality once and for all.

As for independence of agency heads, I think there is theory and then there is reality. If you want and/or need your post, are you, in reality independent of the person who hired you and can fire you? I don't think you are. People in civil service posts are well-protected by their unions and the due process clause, but the same is not so of political appointees.

I also agree with HooptieWagon that the President probably would not nominate some one whose views are in opposition to his vision for the agency. If you promised America net neutrality and wanted to deliver, you probably would not nominate to head the FCC someone who was a venture capitalist who thought tiers were a good idea. Nor would many of the FCCs lawyers be former lobbyists for the broadband providers.

I also think that someone who knows as much about internet regulation as does Wu and who has been legal advisor to the FCC, as has Wu, probably has some idea of what actually goes on there. I don't think he'd fling accusations recklessly.

But, as I said, for purposes of this thread, Wu is hear to support that, from a legal perspective, the January case need not have been an end to the FCC's efforts to pursue net neutrality.