judge in OLK. stops the "no calll list" (page 2)

SanFranciscoJim

What's next? The courts will legalize spamming?

Maybe they'll illegalize Caller ID so you have to answer your phone to see if it's a solicitor calling, or someone you actually want to talk to.

Good grief....where will it end???

Stacy Smith

So some hayseed oakie makes a ruling that affects the entire nation? I think the courts are going way overboard with the authority they seem to think they have.

Euphemism

Okay, this is the part that I find stupidest:

The FTC said the Omnibus Appropriations Act, signed by President Bush in February, authorizes the FTC to "implement and enforce the do-not-call provisions of the Telemarketing Sales Rule."

So... if Congress specifically authorized the FTC to do this... how can the judge claim that they don't have the authority? That just seems patently ridiculous.

The judge must have some sort of agenda here.

I listened to Mark Davis on WBAP (820) Dallas, and he had a lot tot say;one u don'town the phone lines and really can't stop peopple from calling u, and 2 he said, that u can always tell the person, to not call u agian, or u would view that has harassment and act accordingly.

I agree stacy, some hayseed in olk, is now going to decide for all of us. I'm with simon, lets find out some numbers and CALL HIM and all his cloest friends(which is soon to be in the multi thousands).weds

Michael3000

YOU B*******S!

Stacy Smith

The judge must have some sort of agenda here.

I think that's the problem today. Judges have this huge sense of self importance. Of course they come from the lawyer class so there's a huge problem in itself.

How about every time a judge has a verdict or decision overturned by a higher court they have to pay a fine of 5000 dollars? Think they might reconsider their agenda then?

crownboy

How about every time a judge has a verdict or decision overturned by a higher court they have to pay a fine of 5000 dollars? Think they might reconsider their agenda then?

Well, aside from the constitutional untenable aspect of having judicial salaries reduced (which pretty much happens with COLA erosions anyway), wouldn't the judge just then have his decisions be at the mercy of the opinion of any three judge panel? Couldn't the appeals court or the Supreme Court have agendas as well?

So... if Congress specifically authorized the FTC to do this... how can the judge claim that they don't have the authority? That just seems patently ridiculous.
The judge must have some sort of agenda here.

If Congress abicated their power to declare war (ok, so maybe they're doing that right now ) , and made up legislation giving that power to a new agency called the National War Declaration Agency, would a federal judge declaring such an agency's power to declare war unconstitutional (due, of course, to the plain language of the constitution giving only Congress such war declaration power), even in spite of the fact that Congress agreed to such a law, be the result of the judge "having an agenda"?

This decision seems to show that congress indeed did not authorize the FTC to have the power to put together a "do not call" list, they mearly gave them the power to do something that was not specifically granted to them (i.e.: Congress authrozied the FTC to put together the list, though it's not within the FTC's power to do so). In fact, most of the judges decision was very pro-FTC, but obviously the part about shooting down the "do not call" list got a lot of attention. Personally, I don't agree with the decision, because it's too much of a technicality IMO (i.e: Congress could give the FTC the power the judge said they lacked. The FTC in their argument actually conceded that they did not expressly have the power, but that the congressional legislation clearly gave them an implied authority, which under certain conditions is enough. The judge did not think those conditions were met, though that is genuinely debatable), and it will probably be overturned on appeal, but I don't think the blasting of Judge West is really waranted. This type of decision is often made on more mundane things, but this just happened to get a lot of press. Here's a copy of the decision:

http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/ftc/donotcall92303ord.pdf

It seems that Congress has passed a bill clearly outlining the power they're giving the FTC today (who were ther 8 guys that voted "nay"?):

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=&e=1&u=/ap/20030925/ap_on_bi_ge/do_not_call

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c108:H.R.3161: