On Monday, a United States District Court Judge in North Dakota ruled that the state’s law preventing called ID spoofing is unconstitutionally encroaching on Congress’s authority to regulate interstate trade.
While the election is less than a week away, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act’s (TCPA) risks for political campaigns remain in full force. A resident of New York state filed a lawsuit against President Trump’s re-election campaign alleging violations of the TCPA’s prohibitions against the use of an automatic telephone dialing system (ATDS).
The 2020 presidential campaign for Michael Bloomberg, a billionaire media mogul and former New York City mayor, lasted barely more than 3 months and cost a reported $1 billion—mostly coming out of his own pocket.
As we find ourselves in limbo between the anticlimactic Barr Supreme Court case and the potentially momentous Facebook case, Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) litigation continue apace. Two recent court decisions illustrate just how expensive TCPA class actions can be for defendants and how lucrative they can be for plaintiffs attorneys.
A Georgia state legislator faces a class action for alleged Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) violations committed in service of her campaign for a congressional seat.
The entire telemarketing industry is awaiting the Supreme Court’s decision in AAPC v. Barr, the case that very may well invalidate the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) in its entirety. However, the possibility that the main federal enforcement mechanism for regulating telemarketing may soon disappear is no reason for marketers to become lax in their compliance efforts.
While everybody waits to see if the government-backed debt exemption leads to the Supreme Court potentially invalidating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) entirely, a district court somewhat surprisingly decided to enforce that same debt exemption.