IBJNews

Court sides with state on auto-dial law but orders review

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A federal appeals court has ruled that an Indiana law banning most political calls that use automated dialers and recorded messages doesn’t violate federal consumer-protection rules.

But the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals sent a case back to a lower court to decide whether the state law violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

“This decision confirms the position we have been advocating for over a decade in every forum where our telephone privacy laws have been challenged,” Attorney General Greg Zoeller said in a prepared statement. “Federal law bearing on telemarketing simply does not preclude broader state prohibitions.”

But he acknowledged that the lower court will now be reviewing the law again – this time in light of constitutional questions.

“My office will continue to enforce and defend the state’s telephone privacy laws, but there is more work ahead to ensure Hoosiers are protected from annoying and intrusive robocalls,” Zoeller said.

At issue is an Indiana law that applies to commercial and non-commercial speech and prohibits automated, pre-recorded calls unless a live operator introduces the message. Schools are exempted, as are organizations that receive a consumers’ permission to call.

The General Assembly passed the law more than 25 years ago but it was not initially enforced against political parties, campaigns or special interest groups. Over the years, those groups used robo-calls for a variety of purposes – such as sending reminders for voters to request absentee ballots or go to the polls, delivering endorsements from prominent politicians, or criticizing opponents – because they are cheaper than calls made by volunteers or paid-professionals.

But in 2006, then-Attorney General Steve Carter announced he would enforce the law in regard to political calls, too. The Indiana Republican and Democratic parties went along with the decision, but outside groups continued to make the calls and Carter moved to fine the offenders.

One of those groups – American Family Voices, which was using the autodialing machines in the 9thCongressional District race between Democrat Baron Hill and Republican Mike Sodrel – sued the state, leading to an Indiana Supreme Court ruling that upheld the law.

Then in 2010, Patriotic Veterans, a political advocacy organization based in Illinois, sued the state in federal court, challenging that the law violated the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act as well as the free speech clause of the U.S. Constitution.

U.S. Judge William Lawrence of Indiana’s Southern District decided in 2011 that the state law violates the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act, which regulates calls made from one state to another. He did not then rule on the constitutional question.

The state appealed, leading to the appeals court decision on Thursday.

“The plain language (of federal law) dictates that the Indiana statute is not expressly preempted,” the appeals court said. “This is true whether the Indiana statute is one that merely regulates autodialed interstate calls or prohibits them.”

But the ruling said the district court should now have the opportunity to consider the constitutional question.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Don't hang up
    Seems to me one way to shut them down is to listen to their call, then send them a bill for your time in answering the call and listening. They don't pay, hello small claims court.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. why oh why does this state continue to elect these people....do you wonder how much was graft out of the 3.8 billion?

  2. i too think this is a great idea. I think the vision and need is there as well. But also agree with Wendy that there may be better location in our city to fulfill this vision and help grow the sports of hockey and figure skating in Indy. Also to help further develop other parts of the city that seem often forgotten. Any of the other 6 townships out side of the three northernmost could benefit greatly from a facility and a vision like this. For a vision that sounds philanthropic, the location is appears more about the money. Would really like to see it elsewhere, but still wish the development the best of luck, as we can always use more ice in the city. As for the Ice growth when they return, if schedules can be coordinated with the Fuel, what could be better than to have high level hockey available to go see every weekend of the season? Good luck with the development and the return of the Ice.

  3. How many parking spaces do they have at Ironworks? Will residents have reserved spaces or will they have to troll for a space among the people that are there at Ruth Chris & Sangiovese?

  4. You do not get speeding ticket first time you speed and this is not first time Mr.Page has speed. One act should not define a man and this one act won't. He got off with a slap on the wrist. I agree with judge no person was injured by his actions. The state was robbed of money by paying too much rent for a building and that money could have been used for social services. The Page family maybe "generous" with their money but for most part all of it is dirty money that he obtained for sources that are not on the upright. Page is the kind of lawyer that gives lawyers a bad name. He paid off this judge like he has many other tine and walked away. Does he still have his license. I believe so. Hire him to get you confiscated drug money back. He will. It will cost you.

  5. I remain amazed at the level of expertise of the average Internet Television Executive. Obviously they have all the answers and know the business inside and out.

ADVERTISEMENT