根据下面资料，回答题
From the early days of broadband, advocates for consumers and web-based companies worriedthat the cable and phone companies selling broadband connections had the power and incentive tofavor affiliated websites over their rivals'. That's why there has been such a strong demand for rulesthat would prevent broadband providers from picking winners and losers online, preserving thefreedom and innovation that have been the lifeblood of the Internet.
Yet that demand has been almost impossible to fill--in part because of pushback frombroadband providers, anti-regulatory conservatives and the courts. A federal appeals court weighedin again Tuesday, but instead of providing a badly needed resolution, it only prolonged the fight.At issue before the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit was the latest take ofthe Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on net neutrality, adopted on a party-line vote in2017. The Republican-penned order not only eliminated the strict net neutrality rules the FCC hadadopted when it had a Democratic majority in 2015, but rejected the commission's authority torequire broadband providers to do much of anything. The order also declared that state and localgovernments couldn't regulate broadband providers either.
The commission argued that the Federal Trade Commission and the U.S. Department of Justicewould protect consumers and websites against anti-competitive behavior, such as a broadband-providing conglomerate like AT &T favoring its own video-streaming service at the expense ofNetflix and Apple TV. Yet the FCC also ended the investigations of broadband providers thatimposed data caps on their rivals' streaming services but not their own.
On Tuesday, the appeals court unanimously upheld the 2017 order deregulating broadbandproviders, citing a Supreme Court ruling from 2005 that upheld a similarly deregulatory move. ButJudge Patricia Millett rightly argued in a concurring opinion that "the result is unhinged from therealities of modem broadband service," and said Congress or the Supreme Court could intervene to"avoid trapping Intemet regulation in technological anachronism."
In the meantime, the court threw out the FCC's attempt to block all state rules on net neutrality,while preserving the commission's power to preempt individual state laws that undermine its order.That means more battles like the one now going on between the Justice Department and California,which enacted a tough net neutrality law in the wake of the FCC's abdication.
The endless legal battles and back-and-forth at the FCC cry out for Congress to act. It needs togive the commission explicit authority once and for all to bar broadband providers from meddling inthe traffic on their network and to create clear rules protecting openness and innovation online.
There has long been concern that broadband providers would________.