Are Text Messages Calls? Seventh Circuit's Steidinger Decision Reshapes TCPA Litigation Landscape

Chris Willis (0:05)

Welcome to The Consumer Finance Podcast. I'm Chris Willis, the co-leader of Troutman Pepper Locke's Consumer Financial Services Regulatory Practice. And today, we're going to be talking about a very important litigation development, that is a key new decision from the Seventh Circuit involving the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. But before we jump into that topic, let me remind you to visit and subscribe to our blogs, troutmanfinancialservices.com and consumerfinancialserviceslawmonitor.com.

And be sure to check out all of our other podcasts, the FCRA Focus, the Crypto Exchange, Payments Pros and Moving the Medal. All of those are available on all popular podcast platforms. And speaking of those platforms, if you like this podcast, let us know. Leave us a review on your platform of choice and tell us how we're doing.

Now, as I said, today, we're going to be talking about a new Seventh Circuit case that decided the question about whether a text message is a call under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. And joining me to talk about that are two of my partners. One of them is very familiar to you because she's a frequent guest on the podcast, Stefanie Jackman, who she and I have now been working together for 17 years together.

Stefanie Jackman (1:11)

Don't tell people that, Chris.

Chris Willis (1:14)

But we also have a new face on the podcast or a new voice, I should say. And that's Brian Hays, who's one of our CFS litigation partners in Chicago. So, Brian, welcome to the podcast.

Brian Hays (1:24)

Thanks for having me. I appreciate it.

Chris Willis (1:25)

Okay, so we're going to be talking about the TCPA. And before we even get to talking about this decision, I think it's important to note for our audience, Stefanie, that the TCPA is enjoying something of a comeback in terms of case filing numbers in 2026 And that makes this a particularly timely episode for us to air. Do you want to just say a couple of words about that?

Stefanie Jackman (1:46)

Yeah. This case and some others that Brian and I are going to talk about, and by the way, I'm also really excited to have Brian joining the podcast. He is a incredibly experienced TCPA class action lawyer who I really enjoyed having the opportunity to work with given our merger a year ago. So also echoing, welcome to the podcast. The cases that we're going to talk about today, the Seventh Circuit decision and a prior Ninth Circuit decision have been causing my phone and probably Brian's as well to ring with lots of questions about, can we stop thinking about techs as being subject to the TCPA?

There have also been questions about other newer technologies like RCS. I forget what that stands for, but it's an evolving type of text adjacent communication technology. What about things like WhatsApp? How are those configured under the TCPA?

At the same time, we see the plaintiff's bar continuing to challenge the scope of consent, the understanding of the intent and scope of any revocations, challenging or preparing to challenge the use of newer technologies like those I mentioned, as well as AI within the context of communicating with consumers. All of this is in the framework of also waiting to see what will happen with the stayed FCC February 2024 revoke all rule, which right now is the effective date is at least pushed out until January. And while I don't know this to be the case, it wouldn't surprise me in light of some of the things we're talking about today to see it pushed again, but we'll have to find out and see.

Chris Willis (3:22)

Okay, well, let's jump in and talk about the Seventh Circuit decision. The case is called Steidinger, I think, and it was decided on July 14th, 2026 So before we get into the legal decision that the court gave us, why don't you set the stage for us, Stefanie, and tell us what the case was about?

Stefanie Jackman (3:38)

Absolutely. So the facts of the case were fairly straightforward, which is part of why the legal outcome is very interesting in the question that was posed. Here in the Steidinger case, I agree with you, that's how I think it should be pronounced as well, but people can let us know if it's different. The defendant was sending various marketing messages by text that were promoting home sleep tests that the defendant made available. According to the allegations of the complaint, the plaintiff, Seth Steidinger, and a class of individuals, because this was filed as a putative class, claimed that they kept receiving these texts even after asking that they stop, registering their numbers on the national Do Not Call registry, and taking other steps that they contended should have stopped the text, but they were unsuccessful in doing so.