Illinois Federal Judge Holds SMS Messages Are Calls Subject To The TCPA’s DNC Rules

An Illinois federal judge in the Northern District of Illinois has just held that SMS/text messages are “calls” subject to the TCPA’s national and internal Do‑Not‑Call rules in Rabbit v. Rohrman Midwest Motors, decided March 27, 2026.

What the Illinois court actually held

• The court concluded that SMS messages fall within the TCPA’s Do‑Not‑Call framework and therefore can support private lawsuits under 47 U.S.C. § 227(c)(5) when unsolicited marketing texts are sent to numbers on the National DNC Registry or in violation of internal DNC rules.

• Judge Robert W. Gettleman rejected the defense argument that “telephone call” in § 227(c) excludes texts, emphasizing that the statute protects “telephone subscribers” from “telephone solicitations,” and that the FCC has already interpreted “telephone solicitations” to include SMS.

• The court also rejected the contention that wireless numbers are not “residential” for TCPA DNC purposes, holding that cell phones can be treated as residential numbers protected by the DNC rules.

How the court got there

• The opinion leans heavily on the FCC’s long‑standing position that “calls” and “telephone solicitations” encompass SMS, and finds that this interpretation reasonably extends into the § 227(c) DNC regime despite recent attacks on deference.

• Rather than focusing narrowly on the word “call” in § 227(c)(5), the court looked at the broader structure and purpose of the TCPA to protect subscribers from unwanted solicitations, whether delivered by voice or text.

The broader landscape and split

• This ruling squarely conflicts with a 2025 decision from the Central District of Illinois, which held that the term “telephone call” in § 227(c)(5) does not cover text messages, relying on ordinary‑meaning, time‑of‑enactment dictionary definitions and noting that § 227(c) and its DNC rules never mention “texts” or “messages.”

• Other courts outside Illinois have also diverged: for example, at least one Ohio federal court recently held that text messages are not “telephone calls” for DNC purposes after a similar textual analysis, while another N.D. Ill. decision (Mujahid v. Newity) concluded texts are “calls,” emphasizing modern dictionary definitions of “call” as communicating by telephone, which include texting.

• Commentators now describe a “brave new world” and a “major circuit split” at the district‑court level on whether TCPA DNC claims can be based on texts, making forum selection and circuit‑level guidance increasingly critical.

Practical compliance implications

• For entities texting Illinois consumers (and generally in the Seventh Circuit footprint until there is binding appellate guidance), this decision materially increases risk that marketing SMS campaigns can trigger § 227(c) DNC liability (national registry, internal DNC policies, and record‑keeping).

• Given the growing split, conservative programs will treat marketing SMS as covered by both § 227(b) (autodialed/prerecorded “calls”) and § 227(c) (DNC rules), apply robust consent standards, and ensure scrubbing against the National DNC Registry as well as honoring internal DNC requests for mobile numbers.