The First Amendment calling

It has long been recognized that the police power of a state extends beyond the health, morals, and safety of the community, and encompasses the duty to protect the privacy of its citizens, including the authority to protect the peaceful enjoyment of the home and the well-being and tranquility of the community.

So reads a 2006 Indiana Supreme Court opinion relating to automated calls. 

[T]he United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, in a case upholding the constitutionality of the North Dakota Telephone Solicitations Act, N.D.C.C. ch. 51-28, the statute involved here, noted that “residential privacy is a ‘significant’ government interest, particularly when telemarketing calls ‘are flourishing, and becoming a reoccurring nuisance by virtue of their quantity.'”

Colorado robocall ban dead

In Colorado, a law to ban the use of automated dialing systems for certain calls died in committee.  

The State Veterans and Military Affairs committee voted to kill a bill that would have banned most robocalls in Colorado Wednesday.

The committee voted 4 to 1 against the proposal that would have banned the automated dialing systems of prerecorded messages that Colorado Attorney General John Suthers said were “uniquely intrusive” to privacy.

“We presented a bill to limit robocalls that addressed all constitutional concerns and I am disappointed that the Senate Committee voted it down,” Suthers said in a statement.

Opponents said the bill would violate free speech rights.

SueNow.org, LitigateNext.org, ReformerScreedsAgainstCase.org, SpeechSometimeThisYear-Maybe.org

Speechnow.org filed suit in D.C. federal court seeking a preliminary injunction to begin its advocacy as soon as possible.  Case documents are available online.  Writing in today’s Post, Brad Smith and Steve Simpson argue:

The First Amendment guarantees the right of citizens to urge political change, and elections present an ideal opportunity to affect policy by affecting the political futures of those who make it. That requires telling voters how they should vote.

A victory for SpeechNow.org would bring federal campaign finance laws into line with the constitutional principles of free speech and association, and bring them closer to the First Amendment that most Americans already believe we have.