Barrett was confirmed Monday, just shy of a month before oral arguments in a critical TCPA case for the ARM industry, Facebook Inc. v. Duguid. Editor’s note: This article is available or members only.
10/26/2020 21:00
The U.S. Senate voted 52-48 Monday evening to confirm Amy Coney Barrett to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court. She was sworn in by Justice Clarence Thomas after the vote. Barrett comes to the Supreme Court from her role as a judge in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, where she issued narrow readings of Telephone Consumer Protection Act cases, including Gadelhak v. AT&T Services Inc.
On Sunday, the Senate voted along party lines, 51-48, to advance Barrett’s confirmation, Roll Call reports.
Barrett was nominated to the Supreme Court after Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died on Sept. 18. Her confirmation brings a more textualist justice to the court, which could impact the accounts receivable management (ARM) industry through pending TCPA cases, including Facebook Inc. v. Duguid, which is due for oral arguments Dec. 8.
Barrett’s work on the 7th Circuit paints a favorable picture for ARM industry issues with a narrow reading of the TCPA statute.
The Supreme Court, Congress and agencies may be forced to review additional Consumer Financial Protection Bureau structural questions not answered in the Seila Law v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau case, and other questions such as TCPA statutory language this term.
In addition to the Dec. 8 Facebook v. Duguid oral arguments, the Supreme Court also set arguments in a case focused on the leadership structure of a federal agency similar to Seila Law v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
The court will hear oral arguments in Collins v. Mnuchin, which challenges the leadership structure of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), on Dec. 9.
Plaintiffs in Collins v. Mnuchin asked the Supreme Court to consider the outcome in the case if the FHFA’s structure is ruled to be unconstitutional after the court’s decision in Seila Law v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Notably, Ginsburg dissented in the vote in the Seila Law case, The Hill reports.
In Seila Law, the Supreme Court found that the CFPB’s single director structure is unconstitutional, but the provision allowing the removal of the CFPB director only “for cause” is severable from the rest of the statute. As such, the CFPB will continue to exist but its construct will change, and it will be easier to select CFPB leadership based on political affiliation, ACA previously reported.
Barrett’s case record on industry statutes, including the TCPA and Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, proves to be in line with industry priorities on modernizing the laws and compliance guidelines for businesses to meet consumers’ expectations for technology and communication while ensuring protections are in place, ACA previously reported.
Related content from ACA International:
Breaking Down What’s Next for the TCPA
Photo Credit: University of Notre Dame.