Skip to main content

Robocall lawsuits in federal court

Mims v. Arrow Financial Services

Updated Oct 18, 2026

In brief

Federal courts can hear private TCPA suits, too.

Where it stands
Decided

Decided 9-0 · January 18, 2012 · Opinion by Justice Ginsburg

What it’s about
Marcus Mims sued Arrow Financial Services, claiming it violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
Who it affects
Federal district courts can hear private TCPA lawsuits, including Mims' case; the decision did not determine whether Arrow violated the law.

Summary: written with AI from the case record.

Illustration for Marcus D. Mims v. Arrow Financial Services, LLC
Conceptual illustration · AI-generated

What it's about

The Supreme Court unanimously overturned the lower courts’ ruling that only state courts could hear his claim and sent the case back to the lower court (remanded), deciding that state courts’ authority to hear private TCPA suits does not take away federal courts’ authority to hear them.

The TCPA allows private lawsuits, and this case asked whether state courts were the only courts that could hear them.

Question presented

Did Congress divest the federal district courts of their federal-question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 over private actions brought under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act?

What the Court decided

Holding

The TCPA’s permissive grant of jurisdiction to state courts does not deprive the U. S. district courts of federal-question jurisdiction over private TCPA suits. 920, reversed and remanded.

Result
Reversed

The Court's reasoning

The Court treated the TCPA's grant of authority to state courts as permissive, not exclusive. So it did not remove federal district courts' power to hear these federal-law claims.

The vote

  • Joined the judgment
  • Wrote an opinion
Majority · 9joined the Court's opinion
  1. Breyer
  2. Kagan
  3. Thomas
  4. Scalia
  5. Kennedy
  6. Ginsburgwrote the opinion
  7. Sotomayor
  8. Roberts
  9. Alito
9 justices joined the judgment.

What's next

The case returns to the Eleventh Circuit for further proceedings. The Supreme Court did not decide whether Arrow violated the TCPA.

Documents

1

Docket activity

9
  • New analysis added

    Oct 18, 2026 · Court records

  • AI analysis generated: Impact Analysis

    Oct 18, 2026 · Generated

  • AI analysis generated: Opinion Summary

    Oct 18, 2026 · Generated

  • New analysis added

    Oct 18, 2026 · Court records

  • AI analysis generated: Case Briefing

    Oct 18, 2026 · Generated

Show 4 more
  • AI analysis generated: Decision Record

    Oct 18, 2026 · Generated

  • Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata

    Oct 18, 2026 · Court records

  • Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata

    Oct 17, 2026 · Court records

  • Opinion added: Mims

    Jan 18, 2012 · Court records

Sources

Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.

Checked Oct 18, 2026Methodology

Court records and filings

Reporting and analysis