That doctrine, which also is sometimes referred to as the "major rules" doctrine, holds that "an agency can issue a major rule—ie, one of great economic and political significance—only if it has clear congressional authorization to do so."

We presume that "Congress intends to make major policy decisions itself, not leave those decisions to agencies."

Congress has debated net neutrality for many years, but Congress has never enacted net neutrality legislation or clearly authorized the FCC to impose common-carrier obligations on Internet service providers

As then-Judge Kavanaugh put it, the “major questions” doctrine has a “ 'know it when you see it' quality

In this way, the doctrine is "a vital check on expansive and aggressive assertions of executive authority."

T] he Supreme Court's Turner Broadcasting decisions mean that Internet service providers possess a First Amendment right to exercise their editorial discretion over what content to carry and how to carry it

The doctrine, according to Justice Kavanaugh, stands on two presumptions: “(i) a separation of powers-based presumption against the delegation of major lawmaking authority from Congress to the Executive Branch... and (ii) a presumption that Congress intends to make major policy decisions itself, not leave those decisions to agencies

That is because the Supreme Court "made clear" in Brand X, "over and over [,] that the [Communications] Act left [classification] to the agency's discretion."

Reg. 4949 (Feb. 15, 2019)(declaring an emergency at the southern border to get more funding than Congress had appropriated). And net neutrality.

«Under the Constitution' s separation of powers, Congress makes the laws, and the Executive implements and enforces the laws. The Executive Branch does not possess a general, free-standing authority to issue binding legal rules. The Executive may issue rules only pursuant to and consistent with a grant of authority from Congress (or a grant of authority directly from …