EDITOR’S TAKE
A Supreme (Court) Debate Impacting Internet on School Buses?
Written by Ryan Gray |
ryan@stnonline.com P
erhaps most famously for this industry, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1971 with Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education to force school desegregation by using school
buses. How exactly did we get to the most recent deci- sion of the nation’s highest court that impacts student transporters, that being the hastened demise of TikTok, only for President Donald Trump to rescue the social media company on his first day back in the Oval Office? Unlike with Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg, and
at least a half-dozen other cases that dealt with race, due process and educational access, the TikTok ruling minimally impacted school district and bus company transportation departments, having more to do with balancing free speech with national security—and the ability of other social media companies to potentially buy Chinese company ByteDance. True, social platforms have become important and
lucrative content creation tools used by school bus driv- ers and other student transporters to communicate and even promote their jobs. The rise of TikTok and other social channels demands employer oversight of and training for employees, to ensure posts are appropriate and safe, if even allowed. Still, that decision was a mere sideshow to this spring’s
apparent main event, which could result in long-lasting potential impacts on not only funding but student access to internet on school buses. Though not scheduled on the docket as of this writing, SCOTUS is expected to deliberate on the constitutional- ity of the Universal Services Fund (USF) and, hence, the future of the federal E-Rate program administered by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). In addi- tion to funding E-Rate, USF provides monthly subsidies to low-income earners for broadband and bundled broadband-and-voice service, support for areas with high costs for telecommunications services and support for healthcare providers in rural areas. Last summer, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a
9-7 ruling that USF is unconstitutional because it violates the so-called nondelegation doctrine. As Noelle Eller- son Ng, the associate executive director for advocacy and government at the American Association of School Administrators (AASA), explained in a July blog post, the judges said Congress delegated tax authority to the FCC. But the FCC then delegated that revenue raising power to
12 School Transportation News • FEBRUARY 2025
a private company, the Universal Service Administrative Company, a nonprofit run by industry interest groups. The National Association for Pupil Transportation sent an email to members in December signaling its support of the effort led by AASA to save USF because of the benefits to libraries, schools and, now, school buses. FCC said the USF provided E-Rate funding for 65,874 urban schools and 35,648 rural schools during the 2023 pro- gram year alone. All told, FCC said E-Rate has disbursed more than $50 million since it began in 1996. Student transporters last year and for the first time accessed E-Rate funds to reimburse 20- to 90-percent of the cost of installing and operating Wi-Fi hotspots in school bus- es, part of the FCC’s “Learning Without Limits” initiative. In October, about two weeks before the presidential
election, AASA recommended that USF and E-Rate need- ed protection, “to preserve equitable access to affordable broadband for disadvantaged communities, including schools.” But Trump’s Nov. 5 win further emboldened those who have had USF in their crosshairs for years. It is noteworthy that three of the five FCC commis-
sioners that pushed through ”Learning Without Limits” were Democrats. That power has shifted right. Already, Brendan Carr, a Republican, was named by Trump as the new FCC Chairman, replacing Jessica Rosenworcel, a Democrat and the chief architect of the initiative. Last month, AASA filed its amicus brief in support of
USF, with NAPT as one of the 20 supporting organiza- tions. Additionally, a bipartisan group of 21 senators and eight representatives signed on. Last summer, Ellerson Ng said the 5th Circuit Court deci-
sion could be applied nationally, meaning a halt to all USF programs. The decision could also be applied only within the 5th circuit, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas. The third possibility: The decision is stayed pending appeal to the Supreme Court. The justices could ultimately find in favor of USF. But
as recent history and other decisions have shown, that is uncertain. If USF and E-Rate are struck down, program changes during the current fiscal year are not expected. But a decision to end USF and E-Rate would force school districts hoping to rely on funding for Wi-Fi hotspots on school buses to go back to the drawing board. ●
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60
