The Post-Chevron TCPA: A 2026 judicial reset for privacy litigators
On February 25, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a landmark ruling in Bradford v. Sovereign Pest Control of Texas that fundamentally changed how federal courts interpret the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).
The decision rejected the long-standing FCC rule that previously required “prior express written consent” for telemarketing calls to wireless numbers using automated or prerecorded voices. This shift indicates a broader trend of judicial independence from agency regulations.
Credit: Getty Images / Calvin Chan Wai Meng
Plain language vs. agency overreach
In Bradford v. Sovereign Pest Control, the court focused on the plain language of the TCPA. The statute, as written by Congress, requires only “prior express consent,” not “written” consent.
According to the opinion, the Fifth Circuit found that the FCC exceeded its authority by adding a writing requirement that does not exist in the actual law.
- The case: The plaintiff provided his phone number when signing up for a service plan.
- The interaction: He received several prerecorded marketing calls but never asked the company to stop.
- The ruling: The court determined that by providing his number and not objecting, the plaintiff gave the necessary express consent.
This holding removes the distinction between informational and telemarketing calls regarding the form of consent needed. In Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi, businesses can now argue that oral consent or the voluntary provision of a phone number is a valid defense against TCPA claims.
Deference in the rearview: How Loper Bright is stripping FCC Power
This judicial reset follows the Supreme Court decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which ended the practice of courts deferring to federal agencies’ “reasonable” interpretations of laws.
Without the requirement to follow FCC guidance, judges are now conducting independent statutory analysis. The Fifth Circuit used this freedom to set aside a 2012 FCC regulation that had governed telemarketing for over a decade.
Other courts have quickly adopted this approach:
- March 2026: A Maryland federal court in Bradley v. DentalPlans.com relied on Loper Bright to hold that written consent is not required for automated marketing calls.
- The Result: The court decertified a class action, stating the FCC lacked the authority to impose a heightened written standard.
Strategic matching: Sourcing federal claims in a shifting landscape
The breakdown of uniform national standards has created a complex environment for both plaintiffs and defendants. Because the Bradford ruling currently applies to the Fifth Circuit, the written consent rule may still be enforced in other jurisdictions.
This creates a patchwork of legal requirements depending on where a call is placed or received. Attorneys are now looking for cases that fit these specific judicial criteria to test the limits of the new “plain language” interpretation.
As litigation strategies change, firms are using specialized platforms to identify high-value claims. A TCPA attorney matching service like Gotspammedgetpaid functions as a legal bridge, connecting individuals who have received unsolicited communications with legal professionals who understand these local variations in case law. By vetting claims for specific jurisdictional criteria, these services help attorneys find cases that are most likely to survive the current wave of decertification and summary judgments.
State-level responses and future litigation
While federal courts are narrowing the TCPA, state legislatures are moving in the opposite direction. According to legal analysis from Goodwin Procter, several states have introduced “mini-TCPA” laws to maintain strict written consent requirements at the state level.
These laws often cover:
- Text messaging
- Digital solicitations
- Specific automated dialing technologies
The conflict between federal deregulation and state expansion means that TCPA-related litigation remains high. In 2025, over 2,500 TCPA lawsuits were filed in federal courts.
With these 2026 rulings, the focus has moved from simple procedural violations to deep arguments over statutory construction and the validity of agency power. Professionals are now forced to monitor circuit-specific developments daily to remain compliant.