7th Circuit Hears Argument On Whether The TCPA Applies To Text Messages

The Seventh Circuit has heard oral argument in a closely watched appeal that will determine whether the Telephone Consumer Protection Act’s (TCPA) restrictions on “telephone calls” extend to SMS text messages, an issue that has already prompted stays in multiple TCPA class actions and could reshape text-based marketing and collection strategies in the circuit.

What The Seventh Circuit Is Being Asked To Decide

At the center of the appeal is whether an SMS text qualifies as a “call” or “telephone solicitation” for purposes of the TCPA’s Do-Not-Call (DNC) provisions and private right of action under 47 U.S.C. 227(c).

District courts have split on this question following the Supreme Court’s recent clarification that lower courts are not automatically bound by Federal Communications Commission (FCC) interpretations of the TCPA, leading some judges to treat the statutory term “telephone call” as excluding text messages while others continue to follow FCC guidance and circuit precedent that treat texts as calls.

Background: A Longstanding Assumption Under Fire

For years, the working assumption in most courts, regulators, and industry guidance has been that SMS messages are treated the same as voice calls under the TCPA.

That view stems from FCC orders and multiple appellate decisions—such as Campbell-Ewald and subsequent circuit cases—that have recognized a text message to a wireless number as a “call” within the scope of the TCPA’s automated calling and DNC provisions.

The Seventh Circuit’s Existing TCPA Text Message Jurisprudence

The Seventh Circuit has previously stated that text messages to cell phones constitute “calls” under the TCPA and that the statute’s prohibitions therefore apply to SMS-based campaigns.

In earlier cases involving marketing texts, the court not only treated SMS messages as calls but also addressed the scope of consent, rejecting narrow readings that would allow consumers to parse their permission between different categories of promotional messages from the same sender.

Why This New Appeal Matters Despite Prior Guidance

Despite prior Seventh Circuit statements, the current appeal is significant because it squarely presents, in a post-McKesson environment, whether the statutory term “telephone call” in section 227(c) encompasses SMS for DNC purposes when courts are no longer required to defer to the FCC’s interpretation.

The appeal has already led district courts, including those handling class actions against retail brands, to stay proceedings pending the Seventh Circuit’s decision, reflecting a recognition that the ruling could be outcome-determinative.

The Emerging Split: Texts As Calls vs. Texts As Something Else

Recent decisions underscore a growing split among district courts and circuits over whether texts are covered by specific TCPA provisions.

Some courts, especially in the Ninth Circuit and others that continue to rely on FCC guidance, have reaffirmed that text messages are actionable as calls under section 227(c)(5), emphasizing the privacy protections for residential subscribers and their ability to avoid unwanted telemarketing messages.

By contrast, at least one federal district court has held that the relevant TCPA provision applies only to telephone calls and does not extend to text messages, relying on the statute’s plain language and a Supreme Court directive against uncritical deference to agency interpretations, and specifically distinguishing texts from telephone calls.

Interaction With Broader TCPA Developments

The Seventh Circuit’s decision will land in the midst of other major TCPA developments affecting text messaging practices.

The Eleventh Circuit recently vacated the FCC’s “one-to-one” consent rule for marketing calls and texts, holding that the agency exceeded its statutory authority and confirming that existing “prior express consent” rules remain in place while other text-related rules—such as DNC protections and text blocking requirements—continue unaffected.

At the same time, courts and regulators remain aligned on the principle that, where texts are treated as calls, automated or mass SMS campaigns must comply with TCPA consent, identification, and DNC requirements, even as Facebook v. Duguid narrows what qualifies as an automatic telephone dialing system (ATDS).

Practical Implications For Creditors, Collectors, And Fintechs

For credit and collection industry participants operating or litigating within the Seventh Circuit, the forthcoming decision will directly influence compliance strategies for SMS communications to consumers.

If the court holds that texts fall outside the relevant TCPA provisions, collection agencies, creditors, and fintech lenders could see reduced exposure for certain text campaigns in the circuit, though they would still face risk under other federal and state laws, including FDCPA, state mini-TCPA statutes, and unfair or deceptive practices standards.

Conversely, if the court confirms or reinforces the view that SMS messages are “calls” under section 227(c), the decision will solidify that DNC rules and private rights of action fully extend to text messages in the Seventh Circuit, bolstering plaintiffs’ leverage and encouraging continued class action activity centered on text-based outreach.

Compliance Takeaways While The Appeal Is Pending

Until the Seventh Circuit issues its opinion, most risk-averse organizations should assume that SMS messages will be treated as calls and structure programs accordingly.

That means ensuring robust prior express consent processes for marketing and certain informational texts, carefully managing revocation mechanisms and opt-out confirmations, and aligning internal policies with both national TCPA trends and more stringent state-level text messaging regimes.

Given your readership’s focus, you may want to track which district courts within the Seventh Circuit are staying cases pending this appeal and how plaintiffs are framing their theories to preserve TCPA claims regardless of the ultimate definition of “call.”