A federal judge ruled that an Arkansas law prohibiting political robocalls runs afoul of the First Amendment. The law prohibits a person from using a telephone to solicit information in a political campaign when using an automated system for dialing and playing recorded messages. The judge ruled that the restriction on speech did not pass a “strict scrutiny” standard particularly in that it was not “narrowly tailored” in a quest to protect privacy and safety. (Law 360, July 28, 2016, by Allison Grande)
The court found the law discriminatory in that other commercial robocalls not made for a political campaign were not banned out of concern for safety and privacy. It further found that the law restricted political speech at the core of First Amendment protections (The National Law Review, August 2, 2016, by Bradley J. Andreozzi, Justin O. Kay, and Emily T. Borach of Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP)
Venkat Balasubramani, Technology & Marketing Law Blog, September 6, 2016, wrote, “This is at least the second time a court has invalidated a selective robocall statute. Cahaly v. Larosa, a Fourth Circuit case, struck down South Carolina’s robocall statute. Both rely on Reed v. Town of Gilbert, which did not seem like a blockbuster case at the time but has certainly turned into one.”