Attorney generals had argued that President Barack Obama's move violated the U.S. Constitution. | Getty Court says Obama's internet transition can go forward

A federal judge gave a green light to the Obama administration’s hotly contested plan to cede oversight of the Internet to the international community.

In a ruling issued Friday, Judge George Hanks Jr. denied a request from four Republican state attorneys general to temporarily halt the transition just hours before the handoff was scheduled to occur at midnight Friday. The AGs had argued the move violated the U.S. Constitution.


The decision marks a major victory for the Obama administration and its plan to transfer oversight for the Internet's address system to the global nonprofit known as ICANN. And it delivers a win for the tech sector: Companies like Amazon, Facebook and Google have stressed the transfer is important for their industry — an argument they made to the court on Friday.

"What we’ve always said is, we support the transition, we think it’s the right thing to do for the United States’ national security and economic interests, and it’s the smart thing to do for the tech industry," said Abigail Slater, general counsel at the Internet Association.

NTIA, the Commerce Department agency overseeing the transition process, did not immediately comment for this story.

But it may not be the end of the Obama administration's political and legal headaches. Even though the transition may proceed, the four states that sued this week could appeal — and they haven't ruled it out.

A spokesman for Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich said the AG would "continue to explore our options for relief to unwind these improper acts by the Obama administration." The aide added: "When the Federal Government improperly gives up property, the courts can still invalidate that transfer.”

Spokespeople for the attorneys general in Texas and Nevada told POLITICO they are also weighing next steps.

GOP lawmakers led by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) initially tried, but failed, to block the Commerce Department from proceeding with the internet transition as part of a budget bill Congress passed this week. Still, that measure only funds the government until early December, and Cruz and his allies could continue to take aim at the agency when they return from recess. Meanwhile, some House members have floated the idea of their own lawsuit against the Obama administration's transition plans.

NTIA has said its plan is explicitly designed to keep governments away from the day-to-day maintenance of the Internet. But many Republicans still maintain the U.S. government should retain its oversight role. Cruz, whose crusade eventually won the support of GOP candidate Donald Trump, has argued that a transition to ICANN will empower the likes of China and Russia, which seek to censor the Web.

Cruz's office couldn't reached for comment, but Democrats were swift to hail the court's decision. Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) called the lawsuit “baseless” and said attempts to block the transition are “misguided and irresponsible.” Reps. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) and Mike Honda (D-Calif.) called the case “meritless” and said Congress clearly lacked a desire to prevent the handover.

The Obama administration began the process of unwinding itself from Internet governance in 2014, at the height of an international uproar over the scope of U.S. surveillance revealed by Edward Snowden's leaks. The idea, one that Washington has considered for decades, drew the support of major tech companies, which implored Congress not to delay it.

In the lawsuit brought this week in the Southern District of Texas, the state attorneys general warned the transfer would amount to an illegal giveaway of U.S. property — one that should have required approval from Congress. They also charged that ICANN might revoke the U.S. government’s exclusive use of .gov and .mil, the domains used by states, federal agencies and the U.S. military.

In response, government lawyers criticized the states for failing to detail their concerns over the course of the Obama administration's two-year transition process. In their own filing, they said the AGs didn't have standing to sue and couldn't actually prove that the transfer would be harmful to their states.

"In the universe of people who care about Internet freedom, all of the people in that category are on the side of the transition taking place," said Ed Black, the president of the Computer and Communications Industry Association. "Clearly the whole thing has a little bit of the theater of the absurd."

Ashley Gold contributed to this report.