Federal judge: Indiana can block automated political calls

A federal judge has ruled Indiana can block a California-based group from making automated calls that attacked Democratic congressional candidate Baron Hill, who is challenging Republican U.S. Rep. Mike Sodrel in the 9th District.\nIn September, Indiana Attorney General Steve Carter sued the Economic Freedom Fund in Brown County after receiving 12 consumer complaints about the calls, which are prohibited by state law unless previously agreed to by the recipient. The fierce 9th District race was expected to be one of the closest in the country as both parties fight for control of the U.S. House.\nFreeEats.com, the Virginia company that made the calls on behalf of the Economic Freedom Fund, later filed a federal lawsuit against Indiana claiming that its ban on such calls is an unconstitutional restraint on free speech and interstate commerce.\nTuesday's ruling by U.S. District Judge Larry McKinney denied FreeEats' motion, saying the automated-calls ban does not violate the First Amendment or restrain interstate commerce.\nEarlier this month, the company lost a U.S. Supreme Court challenge to a North Dakota law that bars telemarketers from making prerecorded interstate calls to that state's residents.\nMcKinney found Indiana's statute leaves open "ample alternative forms" of political speech such as door-to-door campaigning, bulk mailings, leafleting and use of posters and signs. He found the statute does not ban companies from calling Indiana residents, just the automated calls.\n"The government interest served by the statute is the protection and preservation of residential privacy," McKinney's ruling states. "As the (U.S.) Supreme Court has recognized, this interest is 'of the highest order.'"\n"Contrary to FreeEats' suggestion, the harm is more than the simple ringing of the telephone," the ruling states. "A call recipient cannot interrupt a prerecorded message and request not to be contacted, and if the individual does not answer the telephone or hangs up, he or she runs the risk of additional calls in the future."\nCongress has determined automated calls are more of a nuisance and a greater invasion of privacy than a live operator, McKinney found.\nHe also rejected FreeEats' claims that Indiana law is pre-empted by federal law and Federal Communications Commission regulations.\nIn a news release, Carter said "this ruling recognizes the individual privacy rights of citizens."\nFreeEats claimed in its lawsuit that it would cost more than $2 million and take much longer for live operators to call Indiana residents. It claimed the higher costs constitute a restriction of commerce, an argument McKinney rejected.\nA message left Wednesday for a representative at FreeEats' Herndon, Va., headquarters was not immediately returned.\nThe Economic Freedom Fund had agreed to stop making the calls while litigation proceeded.\nIn August, Carter sent a letter to Indiana's Democratic and Republican parties informing them that a 1988 state law prohibited automated phone calls for political purposes. He promised to enforce the law, even though it had been widely ignored during past political campaigns.\nSo far this year, the attorney general's office has taken legal action or filed agreements with eight companies for making prerecorded calls in violation of the state and federal statues.