In the wild new world of TCPA litigation following the end of binding deference to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), one of the more salient questions is whether the Do-Not-Call (DNC) Registry’s protections extend to the sending of text messages. Florida finds itself at ground zero for this debate after three different federal district courts come down on opposite sides of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) question.

This summer, we discussed the Supreme Court’s decision in McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates v. McKesson Corp. that opened the door for district courts to reject the FCC’s interpretations of the TCPA, and in a follow-up post, how courts have split on the question of whether the TCPA allowed the FCC to regulate the sending of text messages to phone numbers listed on the DNC Registry. Florida is one of the more active states for TCPA litigation, and judges in each of the state’s three federal district courts have weighed in on the issue this year.

On August 26, 2025, the Northern District of Florida held that text messages are not “calls” within the meaning of the TCPA’s DNC sections in Davis v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc. The court relied on the “ordinary public meaning” of the phrase “telephone call” at the time of the DNC provision’s enactment, which, in the court’s interpretation, did not include text messages.

A few weeks later, the Southern District of Florida came to the opposite holding in Bosley v. A Bradley Hosp. LLC. Rather than engaging in a textualist inquiry like the Northern District, the court cited pre-McKesson caselaw deferring to the FCC’s rules.

On October 24, 2025, the Middle District broke the tie by holding that the plain meaning of the TCPA’s text does not include a text message in the term “telephone call.” The decision (El Sayed v. Naturopathica Holistic Health, Inc.) cited favorably to the Northern District’s reasoning in Davis.

While both the Northern District and Southern District cases were resolved by the parties without an appeal, this split of authority raises the likelihood that the Eleventh Circuit will eventually be asked to weigh in on this issue. Businesses engaged in text messaging with current or potential customers should keep a close eye on the cases considering this issue.

Key Takeaways

• Businesses should not assume uniform protection across districts. Messaging programs reaching Florida consumers may face different interpretations depending on where a lawsuit is filed.

• Compliance strategies should remain conservative until appellate clarity emerges. Companies should maintain clear, documented consent practices, honor DNC requests, and monitor developments closely as the jurisprudence evolves.
• Record retention remains key to risk management. Maintaining a structured audit trail of consent artifacts — ideally centralized and exportable — allows companies to respond quickly to litigation or regulatory inquiries.