The Federal Communications Commission lacks the authority to restore net neutrality rules that prevented broadband providers from slowing or blocking access to internet content, a federal appeals court ruled on Thursday.

Why it matters: The all-Republican panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit handed a blow to the Biden administration, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and other Democrats who've pushed for fair and open internet measures.

Zoom in: Judge Richard Allen Griffin said in the ruling in Cincinnati, Ohio, that broadband internet is an "information service" instead of a "telecommunications service," meaning the FCC lacked authority to impose rules under Title II.

• The judges declared that the FCC did not have the authority to prohibit telecommunications companies from blocking or stifling internet content and creating "fast lanes" for certain web companies that pay a fee.
• The panel pointed to a Supreme Court decision in a 2024 case known as Loper Bright, which overturned Chevron deference that gave deference to government agencies on regulations.
• "Applying Loper Bright means we can end the FCC's vacillations," the court ruled.

Between the lines: Brendan Carr, the incoming FCC chair, has advocated for rolling back net neutrality rules and is a staunch proponent of deregulating legacy industries.

• He said in defense of his vote to end net neutrality rules in 2017 that the decision brought a "great day for consumers, for innovation and for freedom."

What they're saying: "Consumers across the country have told us again and again that they want an internet that is fast, open, and fair," said Jessica Rosenworcel, Democratic FCC chair, in a statement.

• "With this decision it is clear that Congress now needs to heed their call, take up the charge for net neutrality, and put open internet principles in federal law."

A handful of conservative critics of Elon Musk are alleging censorship and claiming they were stripped of their verification badges on X after challenging his views on H-1B visas for highly skilled foreign workers.

Why it matters: The H-1B issue and an X post by Musk ally Vivek Ramaswamy about America's culture of "mediocrity" have sparked an online MAGA civil war over immigration and race. Some supporters of President-elect Trump are now turning on Musk and the tech bros Trump has tapped for key administration roles.

Between the lines: The claims of "censorship" on X are difficult to verify.

• Since Musk purchased Twitter and implemented sweeping staff cuts, it's often been difficult to get answers as to whether or why certain accounts or posts have been minimized. X did not respond to Axios' request for comment.
• Conservatives have long blamed "shadow bans" for censoring them on social media even when there hasn't been explicit proof. However, Musk's X has often been hailed by conservatives as a bastion of free speech.

Driving the news: Trump's conspiracy-minded ally Laura Loomer, New York Young Republican Club president Gavin Wax and InfoWars host Owen Shroyer all said their verification badges disappeared after they criticized Musk's support for H-1B visas, railed against Indian culture and attacked Ramaswamy, Musk's DOGE co-chair.

What they're saying: In response to a user who said replies were being hidden from her posts, Loomer stated that there is a "full censorship of my account simply because I called out H-1B visas. This is anti-American behavior by tech oligarchs."

• "Insane that blue checks are being removed from accounts that have been vocal in their criticism of the H1B racket," Wax said.
• "I just lost my verification...was told my account is 'under review,'" Shroyer said.
• Those updates from the three critics were posted around the same time Thursday night. There has been no official response from Musk or X.

The other side: A few hours before those posts, Musk shared in a post that the X "algorithm is trying to maximize unregretted user-seconds."

• "If far more credible, verified subscriber accounts (not bots) mute/block your account compared to those who like your posts, your reach will decline significantly."
• He later said that "any accounts found to be engaged in coordinated attacks to spam target accounts with mute/blocks will themselves be categorized – correctly – as spam."

How it happened: Loomer helped spark the H-1B debate earlier this week by criticizing a Trump appointee's previous support for allowing more highly skilled workers to enter the U.S.

• Musk weighed in Wednesday, saying America had too few "talented" and "motivated" engineers and needed "to recruit top talent wherever they may be."
• Loomer's stream of posts since then has included criticisms of Musk and racist claims about Indian people. She has also been backed up by Trump-world allies like Steve Bannon in her efforts to split Big Tech and MAGA.
• "Loomer is trolling for attention. Ignore," Musk posted on X.

Flashback: Musk has a history of punishing news organizations and journalists he doesn't like, ostensibly for policy violations.

• He threatened to reassign NPR's account handle last year and marked some links to the site as "unsafe" when users click through.
• Musk also removed the verification badge of The New York Times in 2023.
• X also suspended independent journalist Ken Klippenstein's account after he shared Sen. JD Vance's vetting document from the alleged Iranian hack of Trump's campaign.

Go deeper: MAGA civil war breaks out over American "mediocrity" culture

TikTok asked the Supreme Court on Monday to temporarily block a law that would effectively ban the social media app in the U.S.

Why it matters: This is TikTok's last resort as the request follows a denial by a U.S. Appeals Court to grant an injunction on the ban law until the Supreme Court decides whether or not to take up the case.

Driving the news: TikTok's emergency appeal says the law violates the company's First Amendment rights and its over 170 million American app users.

• "Because TikTok Inc. is a U.S. company exercising editorial discretion over a U.S. speech platform, the First Amendment fully protects it from Congress's attempt to ban its operation of the platform based on its purported susceptibility to foreign influence," lawyers for TikTok wrote.

Zoom out: The TikTok ban law is set to go into effect on Jan. 19. Barring an appeal, tech companies like Google and Apple will be legally required to remove TikTok from their app stores.

• Congress could also choose to repeal the law, but that seems unlikely. President-elect Trump, who has flip-flopped on the issue, could try to urge his DOJ not to enforce the ban.

The law requires TikTok to sell the app to a U.S. company by Jan. 19 to prevent the ban from taking effect, but no potential buyers appear poised to complete a deal by the deadline.

What to watch: Trump said he has a "warm spot" in his "heart for TikTok" and would look at whether to stave off the looming ban.

• However, he doesn't take office until Jan. 20.
• Trump is expected to meet with TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew at Mar-a-Lago today.

Go deeper: What to know about TikTok's future under Trump