The wins just keep on coming for the Squire Patton Boggs TCPA defense team.
Often times deliver first in the nation results— but sometimes being third isn’t so bad.
Just today the team–in a defense lead by the powerful Archduke of the Realm— delivered a fantastic win for one the firms’ clients: a third-in-the-nation ruling that the TCPA is unenforceable as to calls made prior to July 6, 2020 because it was an unconstitutional content-specific restriction on speech. The ruling is Hussain v. Synergy, et al., Case No. 5:20-cv-00038-JSM-PRL, Doc. 74 (M.D. Fl. Dec. 11, 2020) and it is available here: Hussain
This ruling follows Creasy and Lindenbaum in determining that the Supreme Court’s ruling in AAPC definitively established the TCPA was rendered unenforceable following the addition of the government-backed debt exemption in 2015. That means the Court cannot enforce the provision–and TCPA defendants sued for calls made during that timeframe (including in class actions) are entitled to judgment.
In many ways Hussain is the best of the bunch. The ruling– issued by the esteemed Hon. James S. Moody–is clear, direct, and precise in its reasoning.
Hussain also suggests that the ENTIRE TCPA is unconstitutional: the “Supreme Court concluded that the TCPA was an unconstitutional content-based restriction as written when the statute was amended in 2015. To remedy the unconstitutional statute, the Supreme Court severed the government-debt exception from the TCPA and left the remainder of the TCPA intact.”
While many have fretted that AAPC only rendered the ATDS restrictions of 227(b) unenforceable, the language of Hussain clearly extends beyond that subsection.
Hussain represents the first court within Florida and in the Eleventh Circuit to reach this conclusion and is another critical ruling supporting the Creasy position. The score is now 3-0 in favor of Defendants arguing that the TCPA is unenforceable prior to July 6, 2020–and it looks like the position is really about to take off.
All thanks to Daniel of course!