Barack Obama has attempted to successfully break yet another federal law, this time to eliminate the U.S. government’s regulatory oversight of the Internet, and destroy Internet freedom. Instead, the oversight of the Internet, a U.S. trademark, Obama wanted to be regulated by an international governing body, which will most likely eventually be the United Nations, which rejects the U.S. Constitutionality of free speech.
Four State Attorney Generals sued three federal agencies to stop the illegal transfer of Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions:
Attorney Generals Ken Paxton (Texas), Mark Brnovich (Arizona), Scott Pruitt (Oklahoma), and Paul Laxalt (Nevada) sued the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, the U.S. government, and the U.S. Department of Commerce.
Paxton’s office stated:
The Obama Administration’s decision violates the Property Clause of the U.S. Constitution by giving away government property without congressional authorization, the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution by chilling speech, and the Administrative Procedure Act by acting beyond statutory authority.”
They argue that Obama is ceding government property, pointing to a Government Accountability Office (GAO) review that “concluded that the transition does not involve a transfer of U.S. government property requiring Congressional approval.”
Paxton also echoed Senator [score]Ted Cruz[/score]’s warnings that free speech would cease to exist if China, Iran, and Russia were involved in the international governing body to control and censor the Internet.
“Trusting authoritarian regimes to ensure the continued freedom of the internet is lunacy,” Paxton said. “The president does not have the authority to simply give away America’s pioneering role in ensuring that the internet remains a place where free expression can flourish.”