In this episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast, host Chris Willis is joined by colleagues Stefanie Jackman and Brian Hays to discuss the Seventh Circuit’s landmark July 2026 ruling in Steidinger v. Blackstone Medical Services, a unanimous decision holding that text messages do not qualify as “telephone calls” under § 227(c)(5) of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), eliminating a private right of action for National Do Not Call Registry violations based solely on text message communications.
The trio unpacks the court’s textualist reasoning, which anchored the definition of “telephone call” to the plain meaning of the term at the time of the TCPA’s 1991 enactment — when a telephone was understood as an instrument for reproducing sounds at a distance, and the first text message had not yet been sent. They also examine how Steidinger relates to the Ninth Circuit’s earlier decision in Howard, which reached the opposite conclusion under a different TCPA subsection, and whether a genuine circuit split now exists that the Supreme Court will be compelled to resolve.
The conversation then turns to practical implications for litigators and compliance teams. Brian walks through how defense counsel should be leveraging Steidinger in pending cases within and outside the Seventh Circuit, what to expect from plaintiffs pivoting to state telemarketing statutes and state attorney general enforcement actions, and how class definitions are likely to shift. Stefanie delivers a clear compliance message: Steidinger is not a green light to abandon text message compliance controls. Section 227(b) liability, FCC enforcement authority, and a growing patchwork of state laws remain fully intact, and consent remains the most important risk management tool available.
The episode closes with broader context on how Steidinger fits into the post-Loper Bright and post-McLaughlin era of TCPA jurisprudence, in which courts are increasingly willing to reject long-standing FCC interpretations and reexamine foundational assumptions about the statute’s scope.