39
New Articles
Find Your Next Job !
While Stendingr and certain district court decisions may significantly reduce federal TCPA DNC exposure for manually sent marketing texts, many states expressly regulate text messages—even sent manually. Accordingly, businesses considering manual SMS campaigns in reliance on Stendingr and the like should recognize that mini-TCPAs may still be a risk even in the jurisdictions where courts have held text don’t equal calls under the TCPA.
If you’re texting consumers across the country relying on these recent text don’t equal calls decisions, here is a list of state laws you’ll want to keep in mind before you start blasting text messages without consent:
Wisconsin’s telemarketing statute expressly defines telephone solicitation to include the unsolicited initiation of a text message encouraging a purchase, and the administrative rule uses the same approach. ““Telephone solicitation” means the unsolicited initiation of a telephone conversation or text message for the purpose of encouraging the recipient … to purchase property, goods, or services.” Wis. Stat. § 100.52(1)(i).
WI prohibits telephone solicitations “to a telephone number that, at the time the solicitation is made, is listed on the state do-not-call registry.” Wis. Stat. § 100.52(4).
That makes Wisconsin—located in the 7th Circuit—particularly interesting post-Stendingr. While the Seventh Circuit held that a plaintiff cannot sue under the federal TCPA’s DNC provision because an SMS is not a “telephone call,” Wisconsin’s state law prohibits text messages to a number on WI’s DNC list unless an exemption applies.
Indiana’s definition of “telephone sales call” expressly includes text, graphic, image, photograph, and multimedia messages sent via SMS, MMS, OTT messaging or voice-calling service, or similar technology. Ind. Code § 24-4.7-2-9(b)(3).
And IN prohibits making “telephone sales call to a telephone number if that telephone number appears in the most current quarterly listing published by the division.”
That makes Indiana—also located in the 7th Circuit—interesting post-Stendingr. Text messages are prohibited to numbers on IN’s state DNC list, unless an exemption applies.
Florida district courts remain divided on whether a text message qualifies as a “call” under the TCPA.
But the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act (FTSA), Fla. Stat. § 501.059, expressly regulates text messages by defining a “telephonic sales call” to include text messages, voicemail transmissions, and other electronic communications sent to a consumer. The statute generally prohibits unsolicited telephonic sales calls made using an automated system for the selection or dialing of telephone numbers or the playing of a recorded message without the recipient’s prior express written consent, subject to statutory exceptions.
Although the Florida Legislature amended the FTSA in 2023 to narrow certain provisions—including the dialer definition—Florida continues to be one of the most active states for SMS/telemarketing litigation.
In light of the circuit court split in Florida, nothing has really changed for businesses using automated text messaging platforms—if your campaign is subject to the TCPA’s ATDS restrictions, it likely should already be structured to comply with the FTSA as well.
Even if additional district courts follow the Seventh Circuit’s reasoning, plaintiffs’ attorneys are likely to increasingly rely on state telemarketing statutes and consumer protection laws to challenge unwanted marketing text messages. As a result, companies should resist the temptation to view Stendingr as a blanket authorization to expand SMS marketing and should evaluate SMS campaigns under both federal law and each applicable state’s telemarketing statutes.
xoxo
Queenie
More Upcoming Events
Sign Up for any (or all) of our 25+ Newsletters
You are responsible for reading, understanding, and agreeing to the National Law Review’s (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free-to-use, no-log-in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates, or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys, or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.
Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com intended to be a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional. NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us.
Under certain state laws, the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.
The National Law Review – National Law Forum LLC 2070 Green Bay Rd., Suite 178, Highland Park, IL 60035 Telephone (708) 357-3317 or toll-free (877) 357-3317. If you would like to contact us via email please click here.
Copyright ©2026 National Law Forum, LLC
Find Your Next Job !
While Stendingr and certain district court decisions may significantly reduce federal TCPA DNC exposure for manually sent marketing texts, many states expressly regulate text messages—even sent manually. Accordingly, businesses considering manual SMS campaigns in reliance on Stendingr and the like should recognize that mini-TCPAs may still be a risk even in the jurisdictions where courts have held text don’t equal calls under the TCPA.
If you’re texting consumers across the country relying on these recent text don’t equal calls decisions, here is a list of state laws you’ll want to keep in mind before you start blasting text messages without consent:
Wisconsin’s telemarketing statute expressly defines telephone solicitation to include the unsolicited initiation of a text message encouraging a purchase, and the administrative rule uses the same approach. ““Telephone solicitation” means the unsolicited initiation of a telephone conversation or text message for the purpose of encouraging the recipient … to purchase property, goods, or services.” Wis. Stat. § 100.52(1)(i).
WI prohibits telephone solicitations “to a telephone number that, at the time the solicitation is made, is listed on the state do-not-call registry.” Wis. Stat. § 100.52(4).
That makes Wisconsin—located in the 7th Circuit—particularly interesting post-Stendingr. While the Seventh Circuit held that a plaintiff cannot sue under the federal TCPA’s DNC provision because an SMS is not a “telephone call,” Wisconsin’s state law prohibits text messages to a number on WI’s DNC list unless an exemption applies.
Indiana’s definition of “telephone sales call” expressly includes text, graphic, image, photograph, and multimedia messages sent via SMS, MMS, OTT messaging or voice-calling service, or similar technology. Ind. Code § 24-4.7-2-9(b)(3).
And IN prohibits making “telephone sales call to a telephone number if that telephone number appears in the most current quarterly listing published by the division.”
That makes Indiana—also located in the 7th Circuit—interesting post-Stendingr. Text messages are prohibited to numbers on IN’s state DNC list, unless an exemption applies.
Florida district courts remain divided on whether a text message qualifies as a “call” under the TCPA.
But the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act (FTSA), Fla. Stat. § 501.059, expressly regulates text messages by defining a “telephonic sales call” to include text messages, voicemail transmissions, and other electronic communications sent to a consumer. The statute generally prohibits unsolicited telephonic sales calls made using an automated system for the selection or dialing of telephone numbers or the playing of a recorded message without the recipient’s prior express written consent, subject to statutory exceptions.
Although the Florida Legislature amended the FTSA in 2023 to narrow certain provisions—including the dialer definition—Florida continues to be one of the most active states for SMS/telemarketing litigation.
In light of the circuit court split in Florida, nothing has really changed for businesses using automated text messaging platforms—if your campaign is subject to the TCPA’s ATDS restrictions, it likely should already be structured to comply with the FTSA as well.
Even if additional district courts follow the Seventh Circuit’s reasoning, plaintiffs’ attorneys are likely to increasingly rely on state telemarketing statutes and consumer protection laws to challenge unwanted marketing text messages. As a result, companies should resist the temptation to view Stendingr as a blanket authorization to expand SMS marketing and should evaluate SMS campaigns under both federal law and each applicable state’s telemarketing statutes.
xoxo
Queenie
More Upcoming Events
Sign Up for any (or all) of our 25+ Newsletters
You are responsible for reading, understanding, and agreeing to the National Law Review’s (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC’s Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free-to-use, no-log-in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates, or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys, or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.
Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com intended to be a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional. NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us.
Under certain state laws, the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.
The National Law Review – National Law Forum LLC 2070 Green Bay Rd., Suite 178, Highland Park, IL 60035 Telephone (708) 357-3317 or toll-free (877) 357-3317. If you would like to contact us via email please click here.
Copyright ©2026 National Law Forum, LLC