SCOTUS upholds federal internet subsidy

• It's funded through fees on phone and internet service providers.

Driving the news: The court maintained the USF's contribution mechanism.

• "For nearly three decades, the work of Congress and the Commission in establishing universal service programs has led to a more fully connected country. And it has done so while leaving fully intact the separation of powers integral to our Constitution," Justice Elena Kagan wrote.

Catch up quick: The case was brought by Consumers' Research against the Federal Communications Commission.

• Consumers' Research argued too much authority to tax was given by Congress to the FCC, and from the FCC to USAC.
• The Fifth Circuit previously ruled it was a faulty tax.

The other side: Justices Neil Gorsuch, Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented.

• "The Constitution affords only our elected representatives the power to decide which taxes the government can collect and at what rates," Gorsuch wrote.
• "Today, the Court departs from these time-honored rules. When it comes to 'universal service' taxes, the Court concludes, an executive agency may decide for itself what rates to apply and how much to collect."'

What they're saying: "The Committee on Energy and Commerce can now turn its attention to reforming the USF so it can continue to provide every American with access to the connectivity they need to participate in the 21st century economy," E&C Chair Brett Guthrie and Rep. Richard Hudson, the chair of the E&C communications and technology panel, said in a statement.

What we're watching: Congress earlier this month revived a bipartisan, bicameral USF working group to consider reforms to the fund.

• One of the group's leaders, Sen. Ben Ray Luján, has proposed looking into whether Google, Amazon and other internet edge providers should pay into the fund.
• FCC chair Brendan Carr has backed that idea.