The Supreme Court’s decision in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates Inc. v. McKesson Corp. has transformed how courts handle lawsuits under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). Previously, courts deferred to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for interpreting the TCPA. Now, they independently analyze the law, creating new opportunities and challenges for businesses, consumers, and legal professionals. Here’s what you need to know:
- Before McLaughlin: Courts relied heavily on FCC guidance, offering predictable rules for businesses and stronger footing for plaintiffs in class actions.
- After McLaughlin: Courts are no longer bound by FCC interpretations, leading to inconsistent rulings across jurisdictions and a more complex legal environment.
- Impact on Businesses: Compliance is harder without clear FCC rules. Companies must regularly review practices to avoid lawsuits.
- Impact on Consumers: While new legal avenues exist, the lack of uniform standards can cause confusion.
- Legal Trends: TCPA lawsuits are increasing, with courts exploring issues like robocalls, consent, and Do-Not-Call protections.
This shift highlights the importance of staying informed and prepared, whether you’re a business, consumer, or legal professional navigating TCPA regulations.
What is the U.S. Supreme Court Decision in Loper Bright and Why Is the Death of Chevron a Big Deal?
1. Circuit Court Decisions Before McLaughlin
Before the Supreme Court’s decision in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates Inc. v. McKesson Corp., circuit courts followed a strict approach when interpreting the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). They relied heavily on the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), creating a predictable framework for TCPA-related class action lawsuits.
Judicial Deference to FCC
In the pre-McLaughlin era, courts leaned entirely on FCC interpretations of the TCPA. The Hobbs Act required district courts to defer to the FCC’s rulings, leaving only appellate courts with the authority to review the validity of FCC orders. This approach was upheld by seven major circuit courts, including the Fourth, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, Eleventh, and District of Columbia Circuits.
The FCC’s interpretations played a critical role in shaping telemarketing practices. For instance, the agency clarified:
"[P]ersons who knowingly release their phone numbers have in effect given their invitation or permission to be called at the number which they have given, absent instructions to the contrary."
Impact on Plaintiffs and Defendants
This system provided defendants with a clear understanding of the rules, allowing them to align their business practices with FCC guidance. Courts’ consistent adherence to FCC interpretations gave businesses a degree of predictability in litigation. However, this deference also limited defendants’ ability to challenge FCC rulings in district courts.
On the other hand, plaintiffs often benefited from FCC interpretations that leaned in favor of consumers. These interpretations made it easier to bring forward class action lawsuits, giving plaintiffs a stronger footing in TCPA cases.
Practical Implications for Consumers
For consumers, the pre-McLaughlin framework offered a reliable layer of protection. FCC regulations were upheld consistently, shielding individuals from unwanted calls and texts. The uniform enforcement of these rules across jurisdictions also benefited class action plaintiffs, as it minimized the risk of conflicting legal interpretations. This consistency helped ensure smoother nationwide settlements and reduced the likelihood of uneven case outcomes.
This rigid but predictable system set the stage for the significant changes that followed the McLaughlin decision, marking a shift toward more judicial flexibility in TCPA litigation.
2. Circuit Court Decisions After McLaughlin
The Supreme Court’s ruling in McLaughlin v. McKesson has reshaped how circuit courts handle TCPA class actions. By ending mandatory deference to the FCC, courts are now required to conduct their own independent analyses.
Judicial Deference to FCC
One of the most significant changes is that district courts no longer treat FCC rulings as binding. Instead, courts now independently interpret the TCPA, relying on their own statutory analysis. This shift builds on the precedent set in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which established that courts cannot defer to an agency’s interpretation simply because a statute is ambiguous. Now, FCC rulings are treated as persuasive rather than authoritative in private litigation.
"Parties are no longer constrained by unfavorable FCC declaratory rulings and final orders, and can urge district courts to use the full range of statutory interpretation tools in evaluating application of the TCPA."
This new framework places FCC actions on the same level as rules from other federal agencies, such as the FTC and CFPB, which are not governed by the Hobbs Act. As a result, both plaintiffs and defendants must adjust their legal strategies in TCPA cases accordingly.
Impact on Plaintiffs and Defendants
This shift brings both opportunities and challenges for litigants. Plaintiffs now have the chance to pursue claims based on creative legal theories that might have been blocked under the old FCC-deference model. For instance, questions like whether cell phones qualify for the Do-Not-Call Registry, how consent is obtained, and the use of autodialer technology are now open to judicial interpretation.
Defendants, on the other hand, face a more uncertain legal environment. Without the predictability of FCC guidance, TCPA compliance has become more complex. However, defendants now have the ability to challenge FCC interpretations that were previously untouchable. This evolving landscape has also led to concerns about forum shopping, as plaintiffs may seek out jurisdictions more favorable to their claims.
The Supreme Court has also suggested that McLaughlin could impact FCC rulemakings, not just interpretive challenges. Justice Brett Kavanaugh highlighted this broader implication, stating:
"[J]udicial review in enforcement proceedings of course may also include review of whether the rule or order was arbitrary and capricious under the APA or otherwise unlawful."
Practical Implications for Consumers
The changes brought by McLaughlin have also affected consumers, reshaping the TCPA landscape. TCPA litigation saw a spike in 2025, with an increase in cases addressing new issues like online fax solicitations. However, the lack of uniform interpretations across jurisdictions has created a patchwork of legal standards.
For example, in Wilson v. Hard Eight, 2025 WL 1784815 (D. Or. June 27, 2025), a district court chose to align with the FCC’s stance on extending Do-Not-Call protections to cell phones. This decision reflected the court’s own statutory interpretation rather than mandatory deference to the FCC.
Given these developments, businesses are advised to revisit their telecommunication practices, including how they obtain and confirm consent. Companies should also reassess their compliance programs and legal strategies to adapt to this evolving legal environment.
sbb-itb-a8d93e1
3. Consumer Protection Services like ReportTelemarketer.com
The shifting TCPA landscape following the McLaughlin decision has introduced both opportunities and hurdles for consumer protection services. With judicial interpretations now holding more sway than traditional FCC guidance, platforms like ReportTelemarketer.com have had to rethink their strategies for addressing telemarketing violations. This change directly shapes how these services function in the current legal environment.
Impact on Plaintiffs and Defendants
Services like ReportTelemarketer.com have adapted to the legal shifts brought about by McLaughlin, mirroring the broader judicial trends discussed earlier. Founded by Stefan Coleman, this platform has been instrumental in helping over 30,000 consumers recover up to $500 per call while challenging telemarketing practices for more than eight years. The platform employs a dedicated team of investigators, researchers, and attorneys to pursue violators and litigate cases involving unsolicited text messages, faxes, and autodialed or pre-recorded calls. With courts now exercising greater independence from FCC interpretations, ReportTelemarketer.com can craft more case-specific legal strategies, pushing the boundaries of how telemarketing violations are addressed.
Practical Implications for Consumers
In this post-McLaughlin era, services like ReportTelemarketer.com have become even more essential for those dealing with telemarketing harassment. The platform remains free for consumers, recovering attorney fees from violators, even as it navigates the complexities of evolving court rulings. The absence of consistent FCC guidance adds to the challenges, especially with over half of federal TCPA cases proceeding as class actions. This dynamic forces services like ReportTelemarketer.com to continuously update their legal strategies and invest in thorough research to stay effective across various jurisdictions.
The website, managed by Coleman, PLLC, serves as an educational resource for users, offering insights into telemarketing abuse and spam text messages while supporting efforts to combat such practices. The growing volume of TCPA litigation – 1,210 cases filed between January 1 and August 31, 2024, marking a 4.4% rise from 2023 – highlights the ongoing need for these services. As courts continue to refine their interpretations of TCPA provisions, platforms like ReportTelemarketer.com remain vital in navigating this increasingly complex legal landscape.
Advantages and Disadvantages
The McLaughlin decision has significantly altered the landscape of TCPA class actions, bringing a mix of benefits and challenges for different stakeholders. Below is a detailed look at how these changes compare to the pre-McLaughlin era.
Pre-McLaughlin vs. Post-McLaughlin Comparison
The transition from relying on FCC interpretations to independent judicial review has created a more nuanced legal environment. Here’s how the advantages and disadvantages stack up:
| Aspect | Pre-McLaughlin Advantages | Pre-McLaughlin Disadvantages | Post-McLaughlin Advantages | Post-McLaughlin Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Legal Certainty | Predictable compliance standards | Difficult to challenge unfavorable FCC interpretations | Courts can interpret the TCPA independently, focusing on statutory language | Greater uncertainty with potential for inconsistent rulings across jurisdictions |
| Business Compliance | Companies could treat FCC decisions as settled law | Limited ability to argue alternative interpretations | Opportunity to challenge FCC rulings that seem incorrect | Compliance becomes more complex, requiring constant updates |
| Litigation Landscape | Stability from binding FCC interpretations | Constrained by unfavorable FCC rulings | Litigants can push boundaries and challenge FCC positions | More lawsuits as courts explore TCPA interpretations without clear guidance |
Impact on Consumer Protection Services
For consumer protection services, the shift has introduced both opportunities and hurdles. Before McLaughlin, FCC rulings provided clear guidelines for identifying violations. Now, with courts free to interpret the TCPA independently, services must adapt to a more unpredictable legal environment.
"Parties are no longer constrained by unfavorable FCC declaratory rulings and final orders, and can urge district courts to use the full range of statutory interpretation tools in evaluating application of the TCPA. On the other hand, parties can no longer rely on FCC decisions as settled law and must be prepared to litigate positions previously not open to challenge."
This insight from Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP highlights the dual-edged nature of this change. Platforms like ReportTelemarketer.com must now adjust their strategies to account for jurisdiction-specific interpretations, requiring more sophisticated legal analyses.
Practical Implications for Different Stakeholders
Businesses are grappling with a tougher compliance environment. For example, healthcare organizations now face a heightened risk of litigation and must carefully review their communication practices. The days of relying solely on FCC guidance are over, making it essential for companies to stay proactive in updating their policies.
Consumers have gained some leverage, as the ruling opens up new opportunities to challenge telemarketing violations. However, the lack of clear-cut rules can create confusion about what qualifies as a violation. Free services like ReportTelemarketer.com become even more valuable in this evolving legal landscape, helping consumers navigate the complexities.
Legal practitioners are seeing a surge in litigation as courts interpret TCPA provisions independently. This shift encourages forum shopping, where parties seek out favorable jurisdictions. Lawyers must now craft more nuanced arguments, moving beyond the reliance on FCC precedent to address the broader statutory language.
Long-term Strategic Considerations
The ripple effects of the McLaughlin decision are likely to shape the TCPA landscape for years to come. With federal district courts now tasked with independently interpreting the TCPA, the legal system is evolving into a patchwork of standards.
"Federal district courts must independently interpret the TCPA in civil enforcement proceedings and generally are not bound by FCC interpretative rulings."
– Cooley
This creates both opportunities and challenges. On one hand, it allows for more tailored interpretations. On the other, it introduces risks of inconsistency, making it harder for businesses and consumers to operate with confidence. Navigating this fluid legal environment will require careful planning and adaptability from all parties involved.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s 6–3 decision in McLaughlin has significantly altered the landscape of TCPA class actions by removing the obligation for district courts to defer to FCC interpretations. Instead, courts must now interpret the law independently, relying on standard principles of statutory interpretation – a shift that marks a new chapter in how the TCPA is applied.
FCC rulings now carry the same persuasive authority as guidance from other federal agencies, rather than being binding. This change introduces broad implications, including the potential for liabilities that could reach hundreds of millions of dollars.
For businesses, this creates an urgent need to adapt quickly. The legal environment surrounding the TCPA has become more uncertain, as highlighted by Patricia Brum, Partner at Snell & Wilmer LLP:
"The Supreme Court’s decision in McLaughlin eliminates the longstanding requirement that district courts must defer to the FCC’s interpretations of the TCPA… The TCPA remains one of the most potentially risky statutes for businesses, and after McLaughlin, it’s more unpredictable than ever."
This unpredictability demands that companies thoroughly review their communication practices and prepare for an uptick in litigation as courts begin to interpret the TCPA without clear FCC guidance. Additionally, the decision may encourage plaintiffs to seek out jurisdictions that offer favorable interpretations of the law.
For consumers, the ruling offers a mixed bag of opportunities and challenges. While it provides new avenues to address telemarketing violations, the lack of consistent standards across jurisdictions may lead to confusion about what constitutes a violation. In this uncertain environment, platforms like ReportTelemarketer.com play a crucial role in helping consumers navigate the complexities of the TCPA.
The differing interpretations across circuits only add to the uncertainty. With statutory construction of the TCPA likely to vary from one jurisdiction to another, both businesses and consumers must stay alert to local rulings and be ready to adjust their strategies accordingly.
In this evolving regulatory landscape, success hinges on proactive measures. Businesses should prioritize compliance reviews and seek expert legal advice to reassess their TCPA programs. At the same time, consumers are encouraged to take advantage of available resources to better understand and assert their rights in this shifting legal environment.
FAQs
What impact has the McLaughlin ruling had on TCPA compliance for businesses?
The McLaughlin ruling has added a layer of uncertainty for businesses navigating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). With new interpretations of key terms, like "autodialer", the decision complicates how companies can anticipate courts’ application of the law across various scenarios.
This ambiguity raises the chances of accidental violations, leaving businesses unsure about what constitutes lawful communication. Keeping up with shifting legal standards and consulting legal experts has become essential for staying within the boundaries of compliance.
What does it mean for consumers now that courts can interpret the TCPA without relying on FCC guidance?
With courts now interpreting the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) without relying solely on the FCC, the landscape of rulings may become more unpredictable. This change could result in different jurisdictions applying the law in varying ways, creating potential inconsistencies.
Although the FCC’s role in enforcing the TCPA has diminished, this shift gives courts the opportunity to reexamine cases individually. These fresh interpretations could either bolster or weaken protections for consumers, depending on the context. Keeping up with these changes is essential to understanding how your rights under the TCPA might evolve.
What steps should businesses take to comply with TCPA regulations after the McLaughlin decision?
In light of the McLaughlin decision, businesses need to take deliberate steps to ensure they’re following the rules set by the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). Start by making clear and documented consent a top priority before sending out any telemarketing calls or texts. This isn’t just a good practice – it’s essential for staying compliant.
Next, take a close look at your current compliance policies. Update them to reflect the latest legal interpretations, as this decision has added new layers of complexity to how the regulations are applied.
It’s also critical to stay on top of updates in TCPA-related rulings. When in doubt, consult legal experts to avoid missteps. By keeping a close eye on these developments and adjusting your communication strategies accordingly, businesses can minimize the risk of expensive class-action lawsuits while continuing to build and maintain consumer trust.
