• Subscribe
  • Log In
  • Sign up for email updates
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

The Texas Lawbook

Free Speech, Due Process and Trial by Jury

  • Appellate
  • Bankruptcy
  • Commercial Litigation
  • Corp. Deal Tracker/M&A
  • GCs/Corp. Legal Depts.
  • Firm Management
  • White-Collar/Regulatory
  • Pro Bono/Public Service/D&I

Gibson Dunn Leads Industry Challenge to FTC ‘Click to Cancel’ Rule

October 24, 2024 Michelle Casady

One week after the Federal Trade Commission announced a final rule making it easier for consumers to cancel recurring subscriptions and memberships, a challenge to that move landed at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit — a court that has a history of invalidating such agency actions. 

On Oct. 16, the FTC issued its final “click-to-cancel” rule, which requires companies to make it as easy for customers to cancel subscriptions as it was for them to sign up. The rule was implemented to combat what FTC Commission Chair Lina M. Khan called the “endless hoops” consumers have to jump through to cancel subscriptions. 

Wednesday, the Electronic Security Association, the Interactive Advertising Bureau and The Internet & Television Association filed a petition for review with the Fifth Circuit arguing the rule is, among other things, “arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion within the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Act.” 

The industry groups argued in their petition that the final rule was an impermissible attempt to regulate “consumer contracts for all companies in all industries and across all sectors of the economy in which the customer purchases a service or subscription that will continue unless the customer exercises the option to cancel.”

“Petitioners respectfully request that this court hold unlawful, vacate, enjoin, and set aside the final rule and provide such additional relief as may be appropriate,” the groups urged. 

In announcing its final rule, the FTC said it has seen a roughly 66 percent increase in the number of complaints about recurring subscription practices since 2021 — up to about 70 a day compared to around 42 a day three years ago. 

The rule was narrowly finalized in a 3-2 vote, with Commissioner Melissa Holyoak and Commissioner Andrew N. Ferguson voting against the measure. 

The Fifth Circuit has shown a willingness to invalidate agency actions that are similar to the FTC rule being challenged here. In recent years, the court has struck down a variety of rules after finding their implementation ran afoul of either the enacting agency’s authority or the federal Administrative Procedure Act. Some of those rulings are:

  • Invalidating the SEC’s use of its own administrative law judges in fraud cases in May 2022; 
  • Invalidating the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program in October 2022;
  • Holding the funding structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau unconstitutional in October 2022;
  • Invalidating an SEC rule that required certain disclosures from private funds and their managers in June;
  • Invalidating the Federal Communications Commission’s universal service tax in July;
  • Invalidating certain provisions of the No Surprises Act in August; and
  • Invalidating the Department of Labor’s tip credit rule in August.

Earlier this month, on Oct. 18, the FTC appealed to the Fifth Circuit seeking to overturn a ruling from U.S. District Judge Ada Brown that enjoined the agency’s sweeping ban on the use of noncompete agreements. 

The industry groups are represented by Helgi C. Walker, Lucas C. Townsend, Michael P. Corcoran, Lael Weinberger, Andrew Ebrahem, Allyson N. Ho, Brad G. Hubbard and Brian A. Richman of Gibson Dunn. 

The case is Electronic Security Association et al. v. Federal Trade Commission, case number 24-60542. 

Michelle Casady

Michelle Casady is based in Houston and covers litigation and appeals — including trials, breaking news and industry trends — for The Texas Lawbook.

View Michelle’s articles

Email Michelle

©2025 The Texas Lawbook.

Content of The Texas Lawbook is controlled and protected by specific licensing agreements with our subscribers and under federal copyright laws. Any distribution of this content without the consent of The Texas Lawbook is prohibited.

If you see any inaccuracy in any article in The Texas Lawbook, please contact us. Our goal is content that is 100% true and accurate. Thank you.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Stories

  • Frisco Attorney Speaks Out Against Dallas Judge’s ‘Standing Recusal Order’ Against Her
  • State Fair of Texas Can Ban Guns, Judge Rules
  • The Home Depot to Acquire GMS Inc. for $5.5B
  • CDT Roundup: Deals Driven by Data, Plus a Deal to Make More Deals
  • Hines CLO Joins Greenberg Traurig in Houston

Footer

Who We Are

  • About Us
  • Our Team
  • Contact Us
  • Submit a News Tip

Stay Connected

  • Sign up for email updates
  • Article Submission Guidelines
  • Premium Subscriber Editorial Calendar

Our Partners

  • The Dallas Morning News
The Texas Lawbook logo

1409 Botham Jean Blvd.
Unit 811
Dallas, TX 75215

214.232.6783

© Copyright 2025 The Texas Lawbook
The content on this website is protected under federal Copyright laws. Any use without the consent of The Texas Lawbook is prohibited.