Speculation is mounting that Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski (pictured) will make a renewed push to assert the agency's authority over network neutrality and broadband before the next Congress convenes.

The FCC could present new broadband rules at a Dec. 15 meeting, or delay the meeting by a week to better prepare. It might also wait until January.

Genachowski led a campaign to enact broadband rules earlier this year, after a ruling from the U.S. District Court in Washington. The decision overturned an FCC ruling on net neutrality, undercutting the agency's authority to regulate broadband under Title I of the Communications Act, which governs information services. Genachowski explored reclassifying broadband under the more onerous Title II of the Act, which applies to traditional telecoms.

Genachowski pitched his proposal as a "third way" that would forgo most rules. Under pressure from Congress and others, he abandoned the process before the election.

The thinking now is that Genachowski will seek authority to regulate broadband under Title I of the code, along the lines of a proposal from California Democrat Henry Waxman earlier this year.

"The problem they've got, is they spent so much time criticizing a Title I approach and why it would not hold up legally," says Jenner & Block LLP lawyer Samuel Feder, who is a former general counsel at the FCC. "If they take a Title I approach now, people are going to quote their words back to them."

To enforce broadband rules under Title I, the FCC would have to argue that it has ancillary jurisdiction because of some specific authority Congress grants it.

"The D.C. Circuit very clearly threw out every rationale the FCC proposed in support of its use of ancillary jurisdiction, while leaving the door open for a few theories that the agency hadn't then offered," says Barbara Esbin of Cinnamon Mueller, another former FCC lawyer.

The FCC could put forward "a revised set of nonbinding Internet principles that would be more consistent with the Waxman legislation," she says.

"The Waxman legislation was intended as a placeholder that took reclassification off the table so that Congress could decide how, if at all, Internet service would be regulated by the FCC."

Representatives of AT&T Inc. (NYSE:T) recently met with Republican Commissioners Robert McDowell and Meredith Attwell Baker in the last week, to lobby for a legislative solution or some other alternative to reclassification. The telecom also had a conversation with the FCC's chief of staff, Edward Lazarus, about the Waxman proposal.

On the other side, advocacy group Center for Democracy and Technology met recently with Genachowski's legal adviser, Zachary Katz. The Center for Democracy and Technology argued that "an unresolvable stalemate on this issue in Congress" makes it imperative for the FCC to act. The group discussed the Waxman proposal with Katz, but emphasized its support for Genachowski's third way.

Another Washington group, Media Access Project, urged Democratic Commissioner Michael Copps to support Title II reclassification.

Whatever Genachowski decides, legal challenges will follow. There may also be backlash from the new Congress.

"You've had a number of Republicans from John Boehner on down who have cautioned the FCC not to proceed," says Andrew Lipman of Bingham McCutchen LLP. "If the FCC were to proceed, there would have to be some fence-mending."