[Martin Tell]

Has anyone slamming the court's decision actually read it? (Be honest.)

No, but I can guess what it is, a lengthy recitation of the authority of the FTC, a quick look at freedom of speech for commercial entities (telemarketers claim a First Amendment right to call), and some conclusory statements about irreparable harm (the standard for grant of a temporary restraining order).

Let's try it another way, through a simple test:

Which of the folowing statments is NOT true regarding the way federal courts interpret the "Right of Privacy" supposedly found in the US Constitution?

(a) Women have an unrestricted right to abort babies

(b) Homosexuals have a right to engage in sodomy

(c) Ordinary citizens have a right to not be bothered by unwanted telephone calls

So, I conclude I have a right to be outraged by this action.

[Labyrinthos]

No, but I can guess what it is, a lengthy recitation of the authority of the FTC, a quick look at freedom of speech for commercial entities (telemarketers claim a First Amendment right to call), and some conclusory statements about irreparable harm (the standard for grant of a temporary restraining order).

I bet you a cyber dollar that the court's decision has nothing to do with free speech or the right to privacy, but rather the power of an executive agency to regulate beyond the scope of the authority that congress delegated.