> In 2014 Verizon challenged the order and managed to get the blocking and discrimination parts vacated
"Vacated" means these parts are no longer the law, right?
> NN isn't arbitrary, and seeking to have it restored isn't; it's an attempt at restoring the spirit/intent of legislation
OK, but the courts have decided that legislation of 2010 was not correct, right, isn't that what "vacated" meant above? So, does it mean FCC in 2015 created some rules in the absence of the law, just by its own authority - and if so, why Mozilla argues changing those rules, again by the same authority, in the absence of the law, is against the law?
> So, does it mean FCC in 2015 created some rules in the absence of the law
No, actually, the court striking down the 2010 Open Internet Order as impermissible given the FCCs citation of Title I authority as it's basis specifically pointed to Title II common carrier classification as a basis that would support the kind of rules that the FCC had adopted.
(Why the FCC resisted Title II classification up through the 2014 draft of what became the 2015 order is an interesting question, of course.)
"Vacated" means these parts are no longer the law, right?
> NN isn't arbitrary, and seeking to have it restored isn't; it's an attempt at restoring the spirit/intent of legislation
OK, but the courts have decided that legislation of 2010 was not correct, right, isn't that what "vacated" meant above? So, does it mean FCC in 2015 created some rules in the absence of the law, just by its own authority - and if so, why Mozilla argues changing those rules, again by the same authority, in the absence of the law, is against the law?