The 11^th Circuit Court of Appeals has struck down the FCC rule that would have prohibited telemarketing or advertising robocalls to consumers unless they consent to calls from only one entity at a time, and that they consent only to calls whose subject matter is associated with the interaction that prompted the consent.

The FCC did not have the authority to issue the rule, the three-judge panel said. “Rather than respecting the line that Congress drew, the FCC stepped right over it,” the judges wrote.

Defending the rule, the FCC had argued that consumers cannot be presumed to have voluntarily consented to receive calls unless they had consented on a one-to-one basis.

The Insurance Marketing Coalition challenged the FCC rule, contending that the FCC had exceeded its authority. IMC asserted that the FCC improperly differentiated between telemarketing and advertising calls, on one hand, and non-telemarketing and non-advertising calls, on the other. IMC also contended that the two restrictions conflict with the ordinary statutory meaning of prior express consent.

In addition, the coalition argued that the 2023 order violated the First Amendment by discriminating against marketing calls.

Finally, IMC said the FCC violated the Administrative Procedure Act because the rule lacked a factual basis for the new restrictions, failed to meaningfully respond to comments submitted and failed to justify its impact on small businesses.

The appeals court said that the FCC had decreed a duty on lead generators that the TCPA does not allow the commission to impose.

“After review, we agree with IMC that the FCC exceeded its statutory authority under the TCPA because the 2023 Order’s ‘prior express consent’ restrictions impermissibly conflict with the ordinary statutory meaning of ‘prior express consent,’” the judges said.

Hours before the court issued its opinion, the FCC said it was delaying implementation of the rule by a year—until Jan. 26, 2026–or until the 11^th Circuit issued its decision. The FCC said that “in the interest of justice,” it was seeking to avoid subjecting companies and callers to private suits seeking damages while the rule was still being reviewed by the appellate court. That deadline—Jan. 26, 2026—obviously is meaningless since the appeals court had delivered its decision and the future of any similar rule is in doubt, particularly with Republicans controlling the commission.

While the 11th Circuit’s decision significantly curtails the FCC’s authority to impose stricter consent requirements under the TCPA, this does not mean that telemarketing and auto-dialing regulations are becoming less complex. In fact, state “mini-TCPA” laws, which have varying consent and disclosure requirements are continually raised in lawsuits. We expect this trend to continue, and we expect states to fill the perceived gaps left by federal limitations. Businesses should closely monitor state-level developments to ensure compliance with an evolving regulatory landscape that remains dynamic despite federal setbacks.