SCOTUS to Decide if Courts Must Follow FCC’s TCPA Interpretations

We aim to highlight the importance of due diligence in lead campaigns and to keep our customers and industry associates up-to-date with the compliance news reported for our industry. The following article is reprinted here for our readers, courtesy of our legal partners Mac Murray & Shuster.  

Read on to understand how the McLaughlin case ruling might impact your business’s telemarketing strategies and the importance of staying agile in TCPA compliance.

Do courts have to defer to the FCC’s TCPA interpretations? Scotus to decide

By Aaron Parry 

Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the decades-old precedent known as “Chevron deference” in the landmark case Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. Chevron deference required courts to defer to administrative agencies when interpreting ambiguous or incomplete federal legislation.

The Loper Bright ruling had little effect on the TCPA because of something called the Hobbs Act. That may all change now, however, as SCOTUS has agreed to review a case that will determine the deference courts must give to FCC interpretations of the TCPA. In McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates v. McKesson Corporation, the Court will consider whether the Hobbs Act requires district courts to accept the FCC’s legal interpretations of the TCPA.

The Hobbs Act mandates that federal district courts follow FCC interpretations of the TCPA and grants federal courts of appeals exclusive jurisdiction to enjoin, set aside, suspend, or determine the validity of certain final orders of the FCC. This effectively prevents a district court from questioning an FCC interpretation of the TCPA. The outcome of McLaughlin could reshape the future of TCPA as well as the relationship between courts and the FCC.

The question of FCC deference under the Hobbs Act has broad and significant implications on the TCPA. This is particularly intriguing because the FCC has long relied on the TCPA, a law over 30 years old, to regulate new calling technologies.

Depending on the outcome, district courts may either have more freedom to interpret the TCPA or be more strictly bound by FCC orders. If deference to FCC rulings is eliminated, district courts will be free to independently interpret the TCPA. Courts will likely review the enforceability of agency-created regulations, such as the FCC’s “Prior Express Written Consent” requirement, which is not explicitly found in the TCPA’s text but has become a key compliance standard. This, and similar issues, would likely lead to inconsistent interpretations across districts regarding term meanings and applicability. Businesses would need to enhance their telemarketing compliance procedures to adapt to evolving case law, especially those businesses that have been relying on favorable FCC orders.

Oral arguments have not yet been scheduled. We will continue to monitor the McLaughlin case and share our recommendations for TCPA compliance best practices.

Get a recap of the latest contact center compliance news delivered monthly to your inbox. Subscribe here>

DISCLAIMER: The information on this page and related links is provided for general education purposes only and is not legal advice. Convoso does not guarantee the accuracy or appropriateness of this information to your situation. You are solely responsible for using Convoso’s services in a legally compliant way and should consult your legal counsel for compliance advice. Any quotes are solely the views of the quoted person and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of Convoso.