Law & Courts

Billions of School Tech Dollars At Risk as Supreme Court Takes Up E-Rate Case

By Mark Walsh — November 22, 2024 3 min read
digital citizenship computer phone 1271520062
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to take up a major case about the constitutionality of the funding mechanism for the Universal Service Fund, which distributes some $4 billion annually under the E-rate program for connecting schools and libraries to the internet.

The justices on Nov. 22 granted appeals by the Federal Communications Commission and the Schools, Health, and Libraries Broadband Coalition of a federal appeals court ruling that struck down the funding mechanism as a “misbegotten” and unconstitutional tax on consumers.

Under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, telephone and cable companies make required contributions to the Universal Service Fund, which through a private entity distributes money to schools and other recipients. The companies pass along such costs to their customers.

“American telecommunications consumers are subject to a multibillion-dollar tax nobody voted for,” said the July 24 ruling by the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, in New Orleans, “The size of that tax is de facto determined by a trade group staffed by industry insiders with no semblance of accountability to the public.”

The practical effect of the 5th Circuit ruling has been limited thus far. While the decision on the constitutionality of the funding mechanism was sweeping, the appeals court delayed the effect of its decision, and the E-rate program has continued to operate normally.

In August, FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel called the 5th Circuit decision “misguided.” And a coalition of more than a dozen education organizations, including the Consortium for School Networking and AASA, the School Superintendents Association, called the ruling “absurd.”

The FCC and the broadband coalition each asked the Supreme Court to take up the case.

The 5th Circuit decision “threatens to nullify the universal service programs—to the detriment of the millions of Americans whom those programs serve,” U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar told the justices in a September filing.

The broadband coalition said in its appeal that the 5th Circuit’s decision casts “doubt on billions of dollars in telecommunications subsidies that strengthen the networks that serve as critical lifelines” to schools and libraries and other Universal Service Fund recipients.

Challengers agree to have justices take up their issue

The funding mechanism was challenged by the Vienna, Va.-based watchdog group Consumers’ Research, which contends that the USF funding mechanism is an unprecedented and illegal delegation of federal taxing power to an “unelected agency bureaucracy.”

The group filed several challenges around the country, and two other federal appeals courts had upheld the funding mechanism, and the Supreme Court declined to review those decisions earlier this year.

But with the 5th Circuit’s decision creating a clear circuit split, Consumers’ Research essentially agreed that the Supreme Court should take up the issue.

“The challengers agree the constitutionality of the USF funding mechanism warrants this court’s review,” Consumers’ Research said in a brief.

There is one wrinkle that came with the Supreme Court’s order granting review. The justices asked the parties to also address the question of whether the case is moot because the challengers’ failed to seek certain forms of preliminary relief before the 5th Circuit.

It isn’t entirely clear what the court means by that, because the parties didn’t address that question in their preliminary briefing. But it could give the court an off-ramp for disposing of the case without any major disruption to the USF and the E-rate program.

The case will likely be argued next March or April and decided by the end of the current term next June. The petitions are Federal Communications Commission v. Consumers’ Research and Schools, Health, and Libraries Broadband Coalition v. Consumers’ Research.

Events

This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Special Education Webinar
Bridging the Math Gap: What’s New in Dyscalculia Identification, Instruction & State Action
Discover the latest dyscalculia research insights, state-level policy trends, and classroom strategies to make math more accessible for all.
Content provided by TouchMath
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
School Climate & Safety Webinar
Belonging as a Leadership Strategy for Today’s Schools
Belonging isn’t a slogan—it’s a leadership strategy. Learn what research shows actually works to improve attendance, culture, and learning.
Content provided by Harmony Academy
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
School & District Management Webinar
Too Many Initiatives, Not Enough Alignment: A Change Management Playbook for Leaders
Learn how leadership teams can increase alignment and evaluate every program, practice, and purchase against a clear strategic plan.
Content provided by Otus

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Law & Courts Social Media Companies Face Legal Reckoning Over Mental Health Harms to Children
Some of the biggest players from Meta to TikTok are getting a chance to make their case in courtrooms around the country.
6 min read
Social Media Kids Trial 26050035983057
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg leaves court after testifying in a landmark trial over whether social media platforms deliberately addict and harm children, on Feb. 18, 2026, in Los Angeles.
AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes
Law & Courts Supreme Court Strikes Trump Tariffs in Case Brought by Educational Toy Companies
Two educational toy companies were among the leading challengers to the president's tariff policies
3 min read
Members of the Supreme Court sit for a new group portrait following the addition of Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, at the Supreme Court building in Washington, Oct. 7, 2022. Bottom row, from left, Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts, Associate Justice Samuel Alito, and Associate Justice Elena Kagan. Top row, from left, Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch, Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Members of the U.S. Supreme Court sit for a new group portrait following the addition of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, at the court building in Washington, Oct. 7, 2022. On Feb. 20, 2026, the court ruled 6-3 to strike down President Donald Trump's broad tariff policies, ruling that they were not authorized by the federal statute that he cited for them.
J. Scott Applewhite/AP
Law & Courts Mark Zuckerberg Quizzed on Kids' Instagram Use in Landmark Social Media Trial
The Meta chief testified in a court case examining whether the company's platforms are addictive and harmful.
5 min read
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg arrives for a landmark trial over whether social media platforms deliberately addict and harm children, Wednesday, Feb. 18, 2026, in Los Angeles.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg arrives at a federal courthouse in Los Angeles on Feb. 18, 2026. Zuckerberg was questioned about the features of his company's platform, Instagram, and about his previous congressional testimony.
Ryan Sun/AP
Law & Courts California Sues Ed. Dept. in Clash Over Gender Disclosures to Parents
California challenges U.S. Department of Education findings on state policies over gender disclosure.
4 min read
California Attorney General Rob Bonta speaks to reporters as Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes, left, and Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield, right, listen outside the Supreme Court on Wednesday, Nov. 5, 2025, in Washington. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)
California Attorney General Rob Bonta speaks to reporters outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington on Nov. 5, 2025, with Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes and Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield behind him. Bonta this week sued the U.S. Department of Education, asking a court to block the agency's finding that the state is violating FERPA by <ins data-user-label="Matt Stone" data-time="02/13/2026 4:22:45 PM" data-user-id="00000185-c5a3-d6ff-a38d-d7a32f6d0001" data-target-id="">not requiring schools to disclose</ins> students’ gender transitions <ins data-user-label="Matt Stone" data-time="02/13/2026 4:22:45 PM" data-user-id="00000185-c5a3-d6ff-a38d-d7a32f6d0001" data-target-id="">to</ins> parents.
Mark Schiefelbein/AP