Skip to content Skip to footer

Cody Olson: The Serial TCPA Litigator Who Took on Bernie Sanders and Political Texting

 

Cody Olson: The Serial TCPA Litigator Who Took on Bernie Sanders and Political Texting

Cody Olson, a resident of Hennepin County, Minnesota, became one of the most recognizable names in political TCPA litigation after filing a lawsuit against the Bernie 2020 presidential campaign over unsolicited campaign text messages. Alongside co-plaintiff Jacob Buller, Olson alleged that the campaign used automated texting technology without prior express consent, violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).

Olson is not simply a consumer who received a random unwanted text. He is not an occasional filer pursuing a single dispute. Public court records and litigation history show a broader pattern of TCPA activity focused on political campaigns, automated messaging systems, voter-data operations, and organizations using large-scale texting platforms.

Legal commentators, defense firms, and federal courts have repeatedly referenced Olson’s litigation in discussions surrounding political peer-to-peer texting systems, commonly known as P2P messaging. His cases contributed to the growing argument that volunteer-driven texting systems may still trigger TCPA liability when volunteers merely activate prewritten scripts through centralized software platforms.

The record supports a consistent characterization: Cody Olson is a serial TCPA litigator who has focused heavily on political texting operations and automated communication systems.

Important Distinction: Three Different Cody Olsons

As of 2026, the name “Cody Olson” is associated with three completely different individuals. Distinguishing between them is critical.

Person Location Role Relevance
Cody Olson (Minnesota) Hennepin County, Minnesota Serial TCPA litigator / plaintiff This profile
Cody Olson (Canada) Alberta, Canada Attorney at Walsh LLP Unrelated
Cody Brian Olson (Texas) Dallas, Texas Federal criminal defendant Unrelated

This article focuses exclusively on Cody Olson of Minnesota, the TCPA plaintiff involved in political campaign texting litigation.

The Canadian attorney and Texas criminal defendant are entirely separate individuals who merely share the same name.

Who Is Cody Olson? A Minnesota Serial TCPA Litigator

Court filings identify Cody Olson as a Minnesota-based serial TCPA plaintiff involved in litigation surrounding political campaign communications, automated texting systems, and voter-data practices.

Professional Profile

Field Details
Location Hennepin County, Minnesota
Role Serial TCPA plaintiff / professional litigator
Most notable case Buller & Olson v. Bernie 2020 Inc.
Main targets Political campaigns, automated messaging firms, voter-data vendors
Primary legal focus Political P2P texting and ATDS liability

Documented Litigation Pattern

Olson’s filings commonly involve:

  • Political campaign text messaging
  • Automated Telephone Dialing System (ATDS) allegations
  • Wrong-number text campaigns
  • Voter-file data enrichment practices
  • Consent disputes involving political outreach
  • Vendor versus campaign liability issues
  • Alleged prerecorded communication violations

Unlike traditional TCPA litigators who focus primarily on robocalls or telemarketing sales operations, Olson’s litigation centers heavily on political communication systems.

The Landmark Case: Buller & Olson v. Bernie 2020 Inc.

Cody Olson became widely known in TCPA circles after filing suit against the Bernie Sanders presidential campaign in June 2020.

Case Overview

Field Details
Court U.S. District Court, District of Minnesota
Case Number 20-cv-01368-ECT-TNL
Filing Date June 15, 2020
Plaintiffs Jacob Buller and Cody Olson
Defendant Bernie 2020 Inc.
Judge Eric C. Tostrud
Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung

Core Allegations

Allegation Details
Unsolicited texts Plaintiffs received campaign texts promoting Bernie Sanders
Lack of consent Plaintiffs alleged they never opted in
ATDS claims Messages allegedly sent using automated technology
Scripted messaging Messages were standardized except for recipient names

The lawsuit quickly attracted national attention because it targeted a presidential campaign during an election cycle where campaigns relied heavily on large-scale text outreach operations.

Strategic Venue Selection and ATDS Theory

The District of Minnesota was viewed as a potentially favorable jurisdiction for broader ATDS interpretations following earlier campaign-texting litigation.

The complaint relied on arguments suggesting that equipment capable of sending large-scale messages from stored lists could still qualify as an ATDS under certain interpretations, even if numbers were not generated randomly.

Defense-side commentary at the time noted that political campaigns had rapidly become major TCPA targets during the 2020 election season.

The Political Campaign Litigation Pattern

Olson’s case was not isolated.

Another TCPA lawsuit involving political texting was filed against the Trump campaign during the same election cycle by Connor Olson through the same law firm.

Plaintiff Campaign Targeted Counsel Relationship
Cody Olson & Jacob Buller Bernie 2020 Same counsel
Connor Olson Trump campaign Same counsel

The overlap led many observers to view the litigation activity as part of a broader coordinated strategy aimed at political campaign texting operations across party lines.

The “Volunteer P2P” Liability Debate

One of the most important legal questions raised by Olson’s litigation involved peer-to-peer political texting systems.

Olson’s Core Argument

Campaign Defense Olson’s Position
Volunteers manually sent texts Volunteers simply activated prewritten scripts
Human involvement defeats liability Centralized systems may still function as automated technology
P2P systems are exempt Large-scale scripted systems can still create TCPA exposure

Why the Issue Matters

Political campaigns historically argued that volunteer-based texting systems fell outside TCPA restrictions because humans physically pressed the “send” button.

Olson’s litigation challenged that assumption by arguing that large-scale messaging platforms remain functionally automated when volunteers merely trigger scripted communications through centralized software systems.

His lawsuits increased compliance pressure on political campaigns, consultants, and messaging vendors throughout the election industry.

The Data Enrichment and Voter File Expansion

By 2026, Olson’s litigation activity expanded beyond messaging platforms and into voter-data sourcing practices.

Key Issues Raised

Issue Details
Voter-file purchases Campaigns purchased large voter databases
Appended phone numbers Vendors allegedly added mobile numbers through data enrichment
Lack of consent Recipients often never consented to receive texts
Wrong-number liability Mistargeted texts became a growing issue

Olson’s litigation increasingly focused on the data ecosystem behind political messaging operations, not just the messages themselves.

Olson v. Grassroots Targeting, LLC (2025)

In 2025, Olson filed litigation against Grassroots Targeting, LLC, a political consulting firm connected to campaign-texting operations.

Field Details
Defendant Grassroots Targeting, LLC
Main issue Wrong-number political text messages
Legal question Vendor liability versus candidate liability
Status Settled in 2025

The dispute focused heavily on whether vendors could face independent TCPA exposure for texting individuals who allegedly never consented to receive campaign communications.

Political Campaigns Became Major TCPA Targets

The 2020 election cycle produced a major increase in TCPA litigation involving campaign messaging.

Campaign Plaintiff Main Issue
Trump campaign Connor Olson Political texting
Bernie 2020 Cody Olson & Jacob Buller Automated text messaging
Multiple campaigns Various plaintiffs Consent and texting compliance

The lawsuits demonstrated that political organizations across the ideological spectrum faced increasing scrutiny regarding mass-texting compliance.

Olson’s Litigation Model

Olson’s cases generally focus on three areas:

Target Area Litigation Focus
SMS marketing Large-scale automated texting systems
Political campaigns Volunteer P2P messaging
Data enrichment firms Appending mobile numbers without consent

The “Wrong Number” Theory

A recurring issue in Olson’s cases involves individuals who allegedly received messages despite never opting in and whose numbers may have been obtained through third-party data enhancement practices.

How Cody Olson Compares to Other Serial Litigators

Comparison Cody Olson Stewart Abramson Andrew Perrong Stanley Hastings
Primary venue Minnesota Western Pennsylvania Eastern Pennsylvania Eastern Arkansas
Main targets Political campaigns Energy and solar Lead generation Lead generation
Signature tactic Voter-file challenges DNC stacking TCPA class actions Fake identities
Political texting focus Yes No No No
Data enrichment claims Yes No No No

What separates Olson from many other serial litigators is his concentration on political messaging systems and voter-data sourcing instead of traditional robocall operations.

The Other Cody Olsons Are Unrelated

Cody Olson (Canada)

Field Details
Location Alberta, Canada
Profession Attorney
Firm Walsh LLP
Practice Areas Business law, estates, farming matters

This individual has no connection to TCPA litigation.

Cody Brian Olson (Texas)

Field Details
Location Dallas, Texas
Case Type Federal criminal proceedings
Status Guilty plea entered in 2022

This individual is also unrelated to the litigation discussed in this article.

What Olson’s Cases Mean for Political Campaigns

The Olson litigation provides several important compliance lessons for campaigns and political consultants.

Lesson Practical Impact
Volunteer texting is not automatic protection Human clicking may not eliminate liability
Voter files are not consent records Possessing numbers does not equal permission
Data enrichment creates risk Appended numbers may trigger claims
Vendors face direct exposure Consultants can be sued independently
Campaigns retain liability Outsourcing texting does not eliminate risk
Wrong-number texting matters Mistargeted texts may create TCPA exposure

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Cody Olson a serial TCPA litigator?

Yes. Court filings and legal commentary identify Cody Olson of Minnesota as an active TCPA plaintiff involved in political texting and automated messaging litigation.

What is Cody Olson best known for?

He is best known for suing the Bernie Sanders presidential campaign over unsolicited political text messages.

Are there multiple people named Cody Olson?

Yes. A Canadian attorney and a separate Texas criminal defendant share the same name, but they are unrelated individuals.

What was the Bernie 2020 lawsuit about?

The lawsuit alleged that the campaign sent automated political text messages without prior express consent.

What is the “volunteer P2P” issue?

Campaigns argued that volunteers manually sent texts. Olson argued volunteers were simply operating centralized scripted messaging systems that could still trigger TCPA liability.

What are voter-file data enrichment claims?

These claims involve allegations that vendors appended mobile phone numbers to databases without consumer consent.

What was the Grassroots Targeting lawsuit?

Olson sued the consulting firm over alleged wrong-number political text messages. The matter settled in 2025.

Is Cody Olson an attorney?

Public records do not clearly establish whether Minnesota Cody Olson is a licensed attorney. The Canadian Cody Olson is an attorney, but he is a different person.

Is Olson helping consumers?

That depends on perspective. Supporters argue his cases improve compliance in political texting. Critics argue the lawsuits are profit-driven TCPA enforcement actions.

Final Thoughts: The Serial Litigator Who Challenged Political Texting

Cody Olson of Minnesota is not an occasional plaintiff pursuing isolated disputes. Public litigation records show a broader pattern focused on political campaigns, automated messaging systems, voter-file sourcing, and data enrichment operations.

His lawsuit against the Bernie Sanders campaign pushed political texting practices into the TCPA spotlight. His legal theories challenged assumptions surrounding volunteer-driven messaging systems. And his focus on voter-data sourcing created additional scrutiny over appended mobile numbers and consent practices.

The distinction between Olson and more extreme serial litigators is also important.

More Extreme Serial Litigators Cody Olson
Used fake identities Uses real identity
Criminal allegations No known criminal history
Fraud accusations No fraud counterclaims
Admitted deception No admissions of deception

Still, Olson remains a documented serial litigator. He repeatedly targets political texting operations, challenges automated messaging practices, and focuses heavily on campaign-data ecosystems.

His litigation helped reshape how political campaigns, consultants, and vendors evaluate TCPA compliance exposure in the modern texting era.

Sources & References

Primary Sources – Cody Olson Litigation

  • https://tcpaworld.com/2020/06/16/sanders-campaign-now-also-a-tcpa-target/
  • Jacob Buller and Cody Olson v. Bernie 2020 Inc., Case No. 20-cv-01368-ECT-TNL (D. Minn.)
  • https://dn710200.ca.archive.org/0/items/gov.uscourts.mnd.188215/gov.uscourts.mnd.188215.1.0.pdf

Secondary Sources

  • Related Trump campaign TCPA litigation
  • Olson v. Grassroots Targeting, LLC (2025 settlement)

Distinction Sources – Other Cody Olsons

  • https://www.walshlaw.ca/lawyers/cody-olson/
  • https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-txnd-3_21-cr-00542/pdf/USCOURTS-txnd-3_21-cr-00542-1.pdf

Disclaimer

This article is based on publicly available court filings, legal commentary, judicial rulings, and media reporting. The characterization of Cody Olson of Minnesota as a serial TCPA litigator and professional plaintiff is based on documented litigation activity involving political campaign texting disputes and related TCPA claims. This profile concerns only the Minnesota Cody Olson associated with TCPA litigation. The Canadian attorney and Texas criminal defendant referenced above are unrelated individuals who share the same name and have no connection to the litigation discussed in this article. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

 

Leave a comment