X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
These cases present the question whether federal district courts have jurisdiction over a telecommunication carrier’s claim that the order of a state utility commission requiring reciprocal compensation for telephone calls to Internet Service Providers violates federal law.

I.

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1996 Act or Act), Pub. L. 104-104, 110 Stat. 56, created a new telecommunications regime designed to foster competition in local telephone markets. Toward that end, the Act imposed various obligations on incumbent local-exchange carriers (LECs), including a duty to share their networks with competitors. See 47 U. S. C. �251(c) (1994 ed., Supp. V). When a new entrant seeks access to a market, the incumbent LEC must “provide … interconnection with” the incumbent’s existing network, �251(c)(2), and the carriers must then establish “reciprocal compensation arrangements” for transporting and terminating the calls placed by each others’ customers, �251(b)(5). As we have previously described, see AT&T Corp. v. Iowa Utilities Bd., 525 U. S. 366, 371-373 (1999), an incumbent LEC “may negotiate and enter into a binding agreement” with the new entrant “to fulfill the duties” imposed by ��251(b) and (c), but “without regard to the standards set forth” in those provisions. ��252(a)(1), 251(c)(1). That agreement must be submitted to the state commission for approval, �252(e)(1), which may reject it if it discriminates against a carrier not a party or is not consistent with “the public interest, convenience, and necessity,” �252(e)(2)(A).

 
Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.

More From ALM

With this subscription you will receive unlimited access to high quality, online, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry. This is perfect for attorneys licensed in multiple jurisdictions or for attorneys that have fulfilled their CLE requirement but need to access resourceful information for their practice areas.
View Now
Our Team Account subscription service is for legal teams of four or more attorneys. Each attorney is granted unlimited access to high quality, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry along with administrative access to easily manage CLE for the entire team.
View Now
Gain access to some of the most knowledgeable and experienced attorneys with our 2 bundle options! Our Compliance bundles are curated by CLE Counselors and include current legal topics and challenges within the industry. Our second option allows you to build your bundle and strategically select the content that pertains to your needs. Both options are priced the same.
View Now
February 24, 2025 - February 26, 2025
Las Vegas, NV

This conference aims to help insurers and litigators better manage complex claims and litigation.


Learn More
March 24, 2025
New York, NY

Recognizing innovation in the legal technology sector for working on precedent-setting, game-changing projects and initiatives.


Learn More
March 24, 2025 - March 27, 2025
New York, NY

Legalweek New York explores Business and Regulatory Trends, Technology and Talent drivers impacting law firms.


Learn More

Boutique Law Firm in Englewood Cliffs, NJ is seeking an Experienced Commercial Real Estate/Transactional Attorney for a full-time position. ...


Apply Now ›

Boutique Law Firm in Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey is seeking a Litigation Associate NJ Bar admission required. NY admission a plus but is no...


Apply Now ›

AttorneyJob Code: LEP023Pay Grade: NFLSA Status: ExemptLegal UnitJob Description:This position reports directly to the Chief Legal Officer, ...


Apply Now ›