By B.N. Frank
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is supposed to protect Americans by regulating the telecom industry. It has instead catered to the industry for decades (see 1, 2).
During the Trump administration lawsuits were filed against the agency for NOT protecting the public from unsafe levels of cell phone and WiFi radiation (see 1, 2) as well as 5G on Earth (see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) and in space. Last month there was a hearing for one of the lawsuits and judges were highly critical of the FCC (see 1, 2). An update was published by the National Law Review.
From Environmental Health Trust:
National Law Review: Court May Reverse the FCC’s Radiofrequency Emission Limits Decision
The National Law Review has published another article on our historic case Environmental Health Trust et al., v the Federal Communications Commission. Watch the 1/25/2021 court proceedings and read the latest press release on our case here.
Please consider a tax deductible donation to help with our legal costs. Your support makes our work possible.
National Law Review: Court May Reverse the FCC’s Radiofrequency Emission Limits Decision
Online link https://www.natlawreview.com/article/court-may-reverse-fcc-s-radiofrequency-emission-limits-decision
Thursday, February 11, 2021
On Jan. 25, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit heard oral argument on the Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC’s) 2020 decision on radiofrequency emission limits (RFE) in which the FCC made a number of procedural changes to its rules but essentially left the RFE limits adopted in 1996 unchanged. See the Jan. 23, 2020 blog entry “Old Limits and New Procedures for FCC RF Exposure Rules” for detailed discussion of the FCC decision.
Press reports indicate that the FCC position was not well received by the Court of Appeals. Strikingly, one of the judges reportedly stated during oral argument that he was inclined to rule against the FCC because the agency’s reliance on U.S. health and safety agencies’ judgments was not well substantiated. The FCC does have an opportunity to add to the record of the case to try to bolster its position.
If the FCC decision is reversed, it could result in an extended period of uncertainty for domestic RFE standards, which would likely raise substantial issues and problems for both manufacturers of wireless radio equipment and network operators. Generally, demonstration of compliance with the FCC’s RFE rules is a safe harbor for equipment manufacturers and system operators and is intended to reassure the public of the safety of RF devices such as smartphones.
The FCC took more than six years to reach its decision to not change the 1996 limits. If the Court of Appeals reverses the FCC and that decision stands (the FCC could request further review in the courts), a multi-year period with U.S. RFE limits no longer deemed valid or appropriate could prove highly disruptive to the wireless industry ecosystem and be unsettling for consumers.
Stay tuned for developments in this case. We will follow-up when the court issues its decision.
Senior Counsel
Michael Fitch has over 40 years of experience in wireless, international, infrastructure and other telecommunications regulatory areas. Mr. Fitch advises clients on a wide range of issues in these areas.
Mr. Fitch began his career at the Federal Communications Commission, where he advanced from staff attorney to Bureau Chief and Senior Legal and International Advisor to the Chairman. He also served as a Presidential Exchange Executive from the FCC to the Westinghouse Electric Corporation in Pittsburgh for one year.
Join the Activist Post Community at Patreon for just $1 per month.
American opposition to 5G and other unwanted wireless installation continues to increase due to concerns about reduced property value (see 1, 2), public safety (see 1, 2, 3), health (see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6), and environmental risks. Opponents have also described 5G installation as a form of “environmental racism.”
High-speed internet is achievable, safer and more secure with a wired internet connection (see 1, 2, 3) – not 5G, 4G (see 1, 2) or WiFi (see 1, 2). Americans have already paid to have safer high-speed internet via fiber optics (see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5). In fact, 5G hasn’t been reliable or faster where it has been installed (see 1, 2, 3)!
Some American municipalities have taken legal action against unwanted deployment (see 1, 2, 3, 4). Cities AND entire countries have taken action to ban, delay, halt, and limit installation AS WELL AS issue moratoriums due to health, safety, environmental and economic risks. Contact your legislators immediately and demand that the next COVID relief bill be written for installing high-speed wired broadband. Remember – Americans have already paid for this!
Americans opposed to 5G may also sign this letter asking President Biden and Vice President Harris to stop deployment as well as attend a free online seminar later this month. Want to know where 5G infrastructure has been installed in your community? A free online tutorial provides instructions on how to locate it.
Activist Post reports regularly about unsafe technology. For more information visit our archives and the following websites.
- 5GCrisis
- 5GFree
- 5G Information
- 5G Space Appeal
- Stop 5G International
- The 5G Summit
- What is 5G.info
- Electromagnetic Radiation Safety
- Environmental Health Trust
- Physicians for Safe Technology
- Scientists4WiredTech
- Wireless Information Network
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE! Follow us on Telegram, SoMee, HIVE, Flote, Minds, MeWe, Twitter, Gab and Ruqqus.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.
Be the first to comment on "National Law Review: U.S. Court of Appeals May Rule Against FCC’s Radiofrequency Emission Limits Decision"