U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies TCPA's Definition of "Autodialer"

Jones Day
Contact

Jones Day

The ruling should limit the FCC's ability to rewrite the statute through administrative action.

In Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid, the Supreme Court resolved the interpretive question at the heart of the swarm of litigation under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA")—whether equipment that dials from a list of numbers qualifies as an "automatic telephone dialing system" subject to the TCPA's statutory penalties. The Court held that it does not. Instead, to qualify as an autodialer, equipment must "use a random or sequential number generator." Slip op. at 7. In both reasoning and result, the Court's opinion tracked Jones Day client the Chamber of Commerce's amicus brief, as well as the victory Jones Day secured for its client Hilton Grand Vacations Co. in the Eleventh Circuit.

Much ink has and will be spilled about Facebook's impact on ongoing TCPA litigation. But the decision's consequences for ongoing FCC proceedings could be just as important to businesses going forward. In 2018, Jones Day client Sirius XM Radio Inc. successfully challenged the FCC's prior attempts to define "autodialers" as arbitrary and capricious. The FCC then sought comment, but it appeared intractably divided. Even though two members had already taken the narrower side of the debate in 2015, the Republican-led FCC made no progress on the issue before the election. With President Biden's appointees set to control the agency, there were concerns that the new FCC would take the broader, more plaintiff-friendly approach.

The Supreme Court's decision in Facebook should substantially alleviate those fears because the Court recognized its result as stemming from the statute's "clear commands." Slip op. at 9. Under existing law, an agency may adopt a reasonable reading of an ambiguous statute even if the Supreme Court has previously taken a different tack, but it may not disagree with the Court if the Court's interpretation follows from the statute's unambiguous terms. In Facebook, the Court used the canons of statutory construction, the rules of grammar, the statutory context, and the practical consequences to identify the TCPA's unambiguous meaning. As a result, there is no room for President Biden's FCC to rewrite the statute through administrative action.

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.

© Jones Day | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Jones Day
Contact
more
less

Jones Day on:

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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide

This website uses cookies to improve user experience, track anonymous site usage, store authorization tokens and permit sharing on social media networks. By continuing to browse this website you accept the use of cookies. Click here to read more about how we use cookies.