Texas’s telemarketing registration law may still apply to unconsented text messages.

The latest example comes in Callier v. Holistic Choice Labs, a Western District of Texas suit filed by prominent TCPA plaintiff Brandon Callier. The complaint alleges a series of unsolicited automated text messages promoting supplements, sent without consent to a Texas number on the National Do Not Call Registry. In addition to classic TCPA counts, Callier also asserts a Texas Business & Commerce Code § 302.101 registration claim—even in the face of “confusion” over the law.

While this is just one filing, Texas’ registration rule that carries a $5,000 per violation penalty may create a brand-new wave of litigation.

Previously, Troutman Amin, LLP explained that while Section 302 requires telemarketers to register if they “call into the state,” the statute doesn’t define “call,” and a recent stipulated order by the Texas Attorney General muddied the waters. According to that order, consent‑based text marketing might be exempt from registration requirements—but the order was not a reasoned judicial opinion, and it doesn’t definitively bind other courts. In other words, the law remains ambiguous and untested on that point, and plaintiffs are moving forward regardless.

So no one knows how Texas courts will ultimately interpret the term “call” in the registration context, and it would be reckless to assume text messages are categorically excluded. That uncertainty did not stop Brandon Callier from filing a Texas registration claim based on unconsented text messages, and it may not stop other plaintiffs either.

According to Callier’s complaint, Holistic Choice Labs engaged in a robocalling by sending a series of automated marketing texts promoting “superfood vitamin supplements.” The messages—sent between November 15 and November 18, 2025—were allegedly unconsented, automated, and targeted a number on the National Do Not Call Registry since 2007.

Interestingly, the weird stipulated Texas order causing all the confusion came out on November 17, 2025.

Callier alleges he never interacted with the company, never visited their website, and never provided consent. He alleges the following causes of action:

• TCPA (47 U.S.C. § 227(b)) – Automated calls without consent
• TCPA DNC (47 U.S.C. § 227(c)) – Calls to numbers on the National DNC list
• Texas BCC § 101 – Failure to register as a telephone solicitor
• Texas BCC § 053 (via § 227(c)) – State enforcement of DNC rules
• Texas BCC § 053 (via § 227(b)) – State enforcement of automated call rules

According to the Complaint, “[o]n November 23, 2025, Plaintiff searched the Texas Secretary of State website… and found no telephone solicitation registration for Defendant. Defendant has never been registered to telephone solicit in Texas or to Texas residents.” This may give rise to a statutory private right of action with damages up to $5,000 per violation—four texts = up to $20,000 in penalties just under Texas law, according to the Complaint.

Each of the counts also includes a prayer for treble damages where applicable. That could mean $1,500 per TCPA/DNC 22(c) violation, $1,500 for each 226(b) violation, $1,500 for each 305.053 § 227(c) violation, $1,500 for each 305.053 § 227(b) violation and $5,000 for each unregistered solicitation under Texas law— just four text messages.

Companies who are ignoring the potential reach of Texas’s registration requirement—especially those relying on “consented “text messages are exempt” narratives—may want to rethink their compliance in Texas, especially since Plaintiffs will always argue consent wasn’t provided.