The ongoing dispute over the FCC's One-to-One Consent Rule centers on its potential to reduce robocalls by restricting consent to individual entities rather than allowing broad collection. Small business owners are requesting an en banc hearing after a three-judge panel vacated the rule. They argue that the panel did not adhere to Supreme Court guidelines, particularly in assessing the FCC's authority. Advocates cite a significant rise in robocalls, asserting that the rule is necessary for consumer trust and better scam call identification.
The business owners, represented by Public Justice, National Consumer Law Center (NCLC), and the National Consumers League (NCL), sought permission to intervene last month after the FCC's new administration said that it paused implementation of the rule and said it was unlikely to defend it.
NCLC senior attorney Margot Saunders said in the press release, 'With the volume of unwanted telemarketing robocalls rising, the FCC's One-to-One Consent Rule is an essential protection for all Americans.'
'The rule will help reduce the tens of billions of telemarketing robocalls that erode consumers' trust in the U.S. telephone system,' said Margot Saunders, emphasizing the rule's vital role.
Leah Nicholls stated that the 11th circuit panel failed to consider the FCC's statutory authority and the experience in creating the One-to-One Consent Rule.
Collection
[
|
...
]