[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.

[Martin Tell]

has nothing to do with free speech

You're on. I agree that FTC authority will be key, but the court is required to discuss the palintiffs' claim and likelihood of success, and in this case that centers on free speech.

BTW, the FTC has broad authority. For example it oversees the right of debtors to mandate what sort of contact creditors have with debtors. Debtors are given the right to stop creditors from calling them (sound familiar?)

For what it's worth, I predict the FTC will be upheld and these rules allowed to stand. Even judges read polls and are bothered by telemarketers.

[Martin Tell]

I bet you a cyber dollar that the court's decision has nothing to do with free speech

You lose.

Opinion is posted at http://news.findlaw.com/cnn/docs/ftc/donotcall92303ord.pdf

See page 11 for first mention of alleged violation of First Amendment rights.