Supreme Court Upholds Cellphone Robocall Ban
WASHINGTON— The Supreme Court on Monday upheld a 1991 law that bars robocalls to cellphones.
The case, argued by telephone in May because of the coronavirus pandemic, stems from a 2015 decision by Congress to carve out an exception to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
The Act generally prohibits robocalls to cellphones and home phones, but the 2015 amendment allowed robocalls to collect debts owed to or guaranteed by the federal government, including to collect student loan and mortgage debts.
Political consultants and pollsters were among those asking the justices to strike down the 1991 law that bars them from making robocalls to cellphones as a violation of their free speech rights under the Constitution.
The issue was whether, by allowing one kind of speech but not others, the exception made the whole law unconstitutional. Six justices concluded it did.
The ruling written by Justice Brett Kavanaugh throws out the exception for government-debt collection, but preserved the broader prohibition.
“As a result, plaintiffs still may not make political robocalls to cellphones, but their speech is now treated equally with debt-collection speech,” Kavanaugh wrote.
He concluded: “Congress created a general restriction on robocalls to cellphones but carved out an exception. That exception is unconstitutional; the court fixed the problem by separating it from the rest of the statute, so now all robocalls are unconstitutional again.”
There are now five decisions to go before the justices wrap up their pandemic-extended term. Two regard subpoenas for President Donald Trump’s tax returns and other financial records, two focus on the religion clauses of the Constitution, and one could determine whether much of eastern Oklahoma is a Native American reservation.
In The News
Health
Voting
Supreme Court
WASHINGTON (AP) — As coronavirus cases surge again nationwide the Supreme Court late Wednesday barred New York from enforcing certain limits on attendance at churches and synagogues in areas designated as hard hit by the virus. The justices split 5-4 with new Justice Amy Coney Barrett in the... Read More
WASHINGTON - Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., told the Federalist Society in a keynote address Thursday night the coronavirus pandemic has led to "previously unimaginable restrictions on individual liberty." "I am not diminishing the severity of the virus's threat to public health," Alito continued in a... Read More
WASHINGTON -- So much for the new conservative majority of the Supreme Court dismantling the Affordable Care Act. On Tuesday, during oral arguments for California v. Texas, one of this term's most anticipated cases, two members of that majority, suggested they're not inclined to strike down... Read More
WASHINGTON — This morning, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on a legal challenge seeking to overturn the Affordable Care Act. This third major challenge to the ACA heard by the Supreme Court, Texas v. California seeks to decide whether Congress, by eliminating the penalty... Read More
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court with new Justice Amy Coney Barrett hears oral argument Tuesday in a case that threatens to wipe out the 2010 health care law, likely the term's most consequential case, under a political spotlight that rarely shines brighter on justices who would rather stay out of it.... Read More
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday set aside an appeals court ruling by a panel of conservative judges that held an injured police officer could sue and win damages from the leader of a Black Lives Matter protest rally. The case had raised alarms among civil libertarians, who said it... Read More
