Law & Courts — Dalton Daily, Monday, November 2, 2026

Justices weigh Trump bid to restart Big Bend border wall construction

Challengers urge the Supreme Court to leave a Texas trial judge's construction freeze in place

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court is considering an emergency request from the Trump administration to lift a preliminary injunction that halted border wall construction across the Big Bend region of southwest Texas. U.S. District Judge Kathleen Cardone of the Western District of Texas issued the order in early October. The Solicitor General filed Mullin v. Friends of the Ruidosa Church (No. 26A560) on Oct. 21. He asks the justices to stay the order and to take the case and reverse it summarily. His main argument is that a 1996 immigration statute lets the Homeland Security secretary waive legal requirements and bars courts from hearing non-constitutional challenges to those waivers. In a 40-page response filed Oct. 29, the challengers, including the Center for Biological Diversity, called the waivers unlawful and warned that construction would resume immediately. The court has not yet ruled.

Why it mattersThe case will test how far Congress's waiver statute limits judicial review of major border construction, and whether the justices will use the emergency docket to settle that question.

SCOTUSblog: Groups ask Supreme Court to leave border wall order in place trade · Courthouse News: Trump asks SCOTUS to bulldoze roadblocks for Big Bend border wall trade

Pennsylvania federal judge rules marketing texts are not 'calls' under TCPA

First Third Circuit district court to side with defendants on do-not-call text claims

HARRISBURG, Pa. — U.S. District Judge Jennifer P. Wilson of the Middle District of Pennsylvania dismissed with prejudice a putative class action over two marketing texts. The Oct. 29 ruling in Bronstin v. Happy Cabbage Analytics, Inc. (No. 1:25-cv-01083) holds that texts are not 'telephone calls' under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act's do-not-call private right of action, 47 U.S.C. 227(c)(5). Commentators believe it is the first district ruling in the Third Circuit to reach that result. Judge Wilson followed the Seventh Circuit's July decision in Steidinger v. Blackstone Medical Services. She reasoned that the 1991 meaning of 'call' involved sound and that Congress used different words elsewhere in the statute. Federal district courts remain divided: other Eastern District of Pennsylvania judges, including a ruling on Oct. 21, have held that texts are calls. The Third Circuit has not yet addressed the question. The ruling does not affect autodialer or prerecorded-voice claims under section 227(b).

Why it mattersFor lead-generation and marketing firms, the split determines whether text-based do-not-call suits can proceed, and exposure to $500-per-message statutory damages, in the Third Circuit.

TCPAWorld (Troutman Amin): Texts Are Not Calls Under 227(c)(5) trade · Seventh Circuit opinion, Steidinger v. Blackstone Medical Services (via GovInfo) primary · Bubeck Law: Three more courts say texts are calls research

Supreme Court opens November sitting with prison-credit and pleading cases

Maxwell v. Dinis and Younge v. Fulton argued Monday; capital habeas and Bivens cases follow

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court opened its November argument session on Monday. The first case, Maxwell v. Dinis (No. 25-5930), asks whether a federal inmate can use a habeas petition to claim First Step Act time credits and so win earlier transfer to a halfway house or home confinement. The Fifth Circuit had affirmed dismissal, holding that habeas does not cover a mere change in prison setting. Younge v. Fulton Judicial Circuit District Attorney's Office (No. 25-352) asks whether a defendant that left an affirmative defense out of its answer can raise it later in the case. Guerrero v. Johnson, a Texas death-row intellectual-disability claim, is set for Wednesday. Nielsen v. Watanabe, which tests the Bivens remedy for a federal inmate's medical claim, is set for Nov. 9. The Catholic preschools' Colorado case is argued Tuesday. The court has not yet ruled in any of these cases.

Why it mattersThe cases will decide when federal prisoners can use habeas, and may further narrow the Bivens remedy, on a docket also marked by election-related emergency petitions.

Supreme Court of the United States: November 2026 argument calendar primary · SCOTUSblog: Court announces cases it will hear in November trade · SCOTUSblog: Five November criminal law arguments trade

Tennessee files more suits over unpaid candidate disclosure fines, naming a Shelby judge

Seven more former candidates sued for $1,000 penalties each

NASHVILLE, Tenn. — The state of Tennessee has widened its collection campaign against former political candidates who did not pay civil penalties. On Thursday, Oct. 29, it filed suit against seven more people. This follows an earlier effort to recover more than $33,350 in fines. According to court documents cited by WKRN, each defendant owes $1,000 for failing to file a disclosure of interest statement. The defendants include Melissa Boyd, who served as a Shelby County Circuit Court judge in 2024. Others include a former Haywood County highway commissioner candidate, a Bradley County school board candidate, a Bolivar city councilman who ran for the state House, and a Caryville alderman. The report does not say how the courts have handled the earlier suits. It also does not say whether the defendants dispute the penalties.

Why it mattersEnforcement now reaches a sitting-level Memphis-area judicial figure, which shows the state is pursuing even small statutory penalties against candidates and officeholders.

WKRN/WJHL: Tennessee sues 7 more former candidates for unpaid fines