McLaughlin v. McKesson: Supreme Court Says Judges Decide What the TCPA Means

What the Supreme Court Decided in McLaughlin v. McKesson

The Court decided the case by a divided vote in mid-2025. Justice Kavanaugh wrote the majority opinion. Justice Kagan wrote the dissent, joined by Justices Sotomayor and Jackson.

The holding is straightforward. District courts must decide what the TCPA means using ordinary principles of statutory interpretation. They should give the FCC’s interpretation appropriate respect, but they are not required to follow it.

The Hobbs Act and FCC Deference in TCPA Cases

Before this ruling, many courts treated FCC orders about the TCPA as binding. A federal law called the Hobbs Act sends challenges to FCC orders to the federal courts of appeals. Several circuits read that law to mean a trial judge in a private TCPA lawsuit had to follow whatever the FCC said.

The Supreme Court rejected that reading. It held that the Hobbs Act does not stop district courts in enforcement proceedings from deciding for themselves whether an agency’s interpretation of a statute is correct.

How a Junk Fax Class Action Reached the Supreme Court

The dispute started with fax advertisements. According to the opinion, McKesson sent unsolicited fax ads years before the lawsuit, without the opt-out notice required by the TCPA. McLaughlin, a chiropractic office, filed a class action in federal court in California.

Some class members received the faxes on a traditional fax machine. Others received them through online fax services, which deliver faxes by email or a web portal. In 2019, the FCC issued a ruling known as Amerifactors, which concluded that an online fax service is not a “telephone facsimile machine” under the TCPA.

The trial court treated that ruling as binding. It threw out the online fax claims and decertified the class, leaving McLaughlin with only a small number of faxes and a modest damages award. The Ninth Circuit affirmed.

Are Online Faxes Covered by the TCPA? The Question Is Open Again

The Supreme Court reversed and sent the case back. It did not decide whether the FCC was right about online faxes, leaving that question for the lower court. That means the online fax issue is open again, and judges will answer it by reading the statute themselves. If you want the basics of fax claims, see our guide to junk fax lawsuits under the TCPA.

Why the McLaughlin Ruling Cuts Both Ways for Consumers

This decision does not change the TCPA itself. It changes who has the final say on what the law’s words mean. That matters because much of the consumer protection in this area comes from FCC orders, not from the statute’s text.

Some FCC interpretations helped consumers. Others limited their rights. After McLaughlin, a defendant can argue that a consumer-friendly FCC rule reads too much into the statute. A consumer can make the same argument about an FCC ruling that narrowed the law. Either way, the judge decides.

Text Messages and the Do Not Call List After McLaughlin

The fight over text messages shows how quickly this played out. About a month after the decision, two federal trial courts reached opposite answers on the same day about whether a text message counts as a “call” under the TCPA’s Do Not Call provision, according to a summary published by the law firm Troutman Pepper Locke. A judge in Illinois said no. A judge in Oregon said yes.

In 2026, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the Illinois ruling. It read the statute independently, as McLaughlin requires, and concluded that a text message is not a “telephone call” under that provision. The decision binds only federal courts in Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin, and the FCC’s own Do Not Call rules for texts remain in effect. We cover that ruling in our story on the Seventh Circuit decision on texts and the Do Not Call list.

FCC TCPA Regulations Now Face New Legal Challenges

Expect more cases like these. Defense lawyers now challenge FCC positions that courts once treated as settled. Some of those challenges will succeed, and some will fail. Our overview of the FCC’s TCPA regulations flags which rules come straight from the statute and which rest on agency interpretation.

What Stays the Same: TCPA Damages, Consent, and Filing Deadlines

The core statute is untouched. The TCPA still provides statutory damages for each violation, and a court can increase those damages if it finds the violation was willful or knowing. Prerecorded and artificial-voice calls to cell phones still require prior express consent under the statute’s text. Federal filing deadlines also still apply, and waiting too long can end a claim, which our page on the TCPA statute of limitations explains.

Which TCPA Claims Are Strongest After McLaughlin

Claims based on the plain language of the statute are the least affected. A prerecorded sales call to your cell phone with no consent is the clearest example. Claims that depend on an FCC interpretation, such as how the Do Not Call rules apply to texts, carry more uncertainty than they did before the ruling.

What to Do About Unwanted Robocalls, Texts, and Junk Faxes

Keep records now, because the legal theory behind your claim may be argued later. Save screenshots of texts, note the date and time of each call, and keep copies of faxes, including ones that arrived by email. Our call log and evidence guide show what to write down.

If your situation depends on an FCC rule rather than the plain statute, have a lawyer look at how courts in your circuit have ruled since McLaughlin. The answer may differ depending on where you live. Because filing deadlines apply, it is best not to wait. A case review costs nothing and tells you whether your facts fit a claim that still holds up.

McLaughlin v. McKesson TCPA FAQs

Did McLaughlin v. McKesson overturn any TCPA rules?

No. The Supreme Court did not strike down any FCC rule. It held that district judges in private lawsuits must decide for themselves what the TCPA means and are not bound to follow the FCC’s interpretation. Each rule can now be challenged on a case-by-case basis.

Is an online fax still covered by the TCPA after McLaughlin?

That question is open again. The Court sent the case back without deciding whether the FCC’s Amerifactors ruling on online fax services is correct. Trial courts will decide it by reading the statute.

Are text messages still covered by the TCPA after McLaughlin?

It depends on the claim and where you live. Courts are split on whether texts count as “calls” under the Do Not Call provision, and one federal appeals court has said they do not. Other parts of the TCPA have long been applied to texts, and the FCC’s own rules still treat texts as covered. A lawyer can tell you how courts in your area are handling these claims.

Does McLaughlin make it harder to sue over robocalls?

Not for claims built on the statute’s plain words, such as prerecorded calls to a cell phone without consent. It does add risk to claims that depend on FCC interpretations, because defendants can now ask judges to reject those readings.