Walburg v. Nack: Recent Supreme Court Petition in TCPA Case Tees Up Important Constitutional Issues

by Latham & Watkins LLP
Contact

By all accounts, the number of class action lawsuits brought under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act against companies communicating by telephone, text, and fax has exploded in recent years.  These lawsuits—which rely on the private right of action at 47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(3) for violations of the statutory prohibitions in Section 227(b) “or the regulations prescribed thereunder”—often seek tens or hundreds of millions of dollars in damages under the statute’s uncapped, $500-per-violation liability provision.  And yet, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce pointed out in a recent study that, even as these lawsuits continue to proliferate, “it is rare these days to see TCPA litigation brought against its original intended target—abusive telemarketers.”  Instead, the targets of these lawsuits increasingly are legitimate businesses from nearly every industry, some of which are facing liability simply for engaging in consensual communications with current or prospective customers.  These businesses have been searching for ways to protect themselves against such lawsuits, and these efforts have come to a head in a recent petition for certiorari filed at the U.S. Supreme Court in Walburg v. Nack, No. 13-486.

The Walburg case concerns an FCC rule requiring that all fax advertisements—even those sent with the recipient’s express consent—include a detailed notice explaining how to opt out of future fax communications.  This rule already is the source of significant controversy; an FCC petition filed in 2010 pointed out that the opt-out notice rule for solicited faxes was adopted without notice, arose from an internally contradictory order, goes beyond the TCPA’s limited regulation of “unsolicited” advertisements, and poses potentially grave First Amendment concerns.  The petition requested that the FCC clarify, at a minimum, that Section 227(b) was not the statutory basis for the rule, and that the rule therefore cannot give rise to class actions under Section 227(b)(3).  Three years later, the FCC still has not issued a final, appealable order at the full Commission level resolving this petition.  In the meantime, numerous other businesses from a wide range of industries—all facing class action lawsuits for alleged violations of this rule—have filed similar petitions at the FCC.

The defendant in Walburg, a small business owner who was sued for tens of millions of dollars under the rule in 2007, attempted to raise various challenges to the rule in the courts below.  Among other things, he argued that the rule is invalid in light of the TCPA’s narrow focus on “unsolicited” advertisements, and that, even if the rule were valid, it cannot trigger a private right of action under Section 227(b)(3) because it was not “prescribed under” Section 227(b).  While the Eighth Circuit noted that it was “questionable” whether Section 227(b) could have given rise to the rule, it ultimately held that such arguments are barred by the Hobbs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2342(1), which vests exclusive jurisdiction in the courts of appeals over any “proceeding to enjoin, set aside, annul, or suspend” an order of the FCC.  According to the court, “[a] party challenging an FCC regulation as ultra vires must first petition the agency itself and, if denied, appeal the agency's disposition directly to the Court of Appeals as provided by the statute.”  The court also held that arguments regarding the scope of the TCPA’s private right of action “involve[] the same need for deference to the agency and nationally uniform determinations as a direct, Hobbs Act challenge.”  The upshot of the Eighth Circuit’s decision is that a business facing massive liability in a TCPA class action cannot defend itself in court by challenging the statutory basis of the administrative rule at issue, even if the rule blatantly exceeds the agency’s statutory authority, and even if the rule is unconstitutional. 

Walburg’s petition for certiorari raises several issues with broad ramifications not only for TCPA litigation in particular but for administrative law and constitutional law more generally.  In addition to arguing that the Hobbs Act does not apply to defensive challenges to FCC regulations in private suits for damages, the petition identifies serious due process and Article III concerns with the broader interpretation adopted by the Eighth Circuit.  The court’s ruling suggests that the only way a defendant may challenge an FCC rule is by petitioning the agency itself, but when parties have filed such petitions, the agency has declined to take final action in response, and has even taken the position that it has no duty at all to resolve such petitions.  The Eighth Circuit’s ruling thus has the practical effect of sealing off FCC rules from any challenge—a result that seems to conflict with traditional conceptions of due process.  Moreover, by requiring courts to apply administrative rules unquestioningly, the ruling appears to upend the core judicial function to “say what the law is” under Article III and Marbury v. Madison.  Several amici curiae have filed briefs underscoring these constitutional concerns and also highlighting the national importance of these issues for TCPA lawsuits across the country.

While it is unclear whether the Supreme Court will grant certiorari, the Walburg proceeding should serve as a cautionary tale for businesses communicating with their customers (whether by fax or otherwise).  Lawsuits like this one—seeking enterprise-crippling damages for allegedly defective opt-out notices on faxes sent with express consent—are growing increasingly common.  And if the Eighth Circuit’s ruling stands, defendants may be hamstrung in their efforts to challenge the agency rules that often form the basis of such lawsuits.

Latham & Watkins represents Anda, Inc., a generic pharmaceutical distributor facing class actions under the FCC’s rule.  On Anda’s behalf, the authors of this post filed the FCC petition in 2010 that first raised these issues, as well as an amicus brief in support of certiorari in the Walburg case.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Latham & Watkins LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Latham & Watkins LLP
Contact
more
less

Latham & Watkins LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.