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

Cody Olson, a Hennepin County, Minnesota resident and serial TCPA litigator, became one of the most recognizable professional plaintiffs in political telemarketing history when he sued the Bernie 2020 presidential campaign over unsolicited text messages. Along with co-plaintiff Jacob Buller, Olson filed a class action alleging that the Sanders campaign sent automated text messages without prior express consent, in violation of the TCPA.

Olson is not a casual consumer who received a single unwanted text. He is not an occasional filer. He is a serial litigator whose business model depends on extracting statutory damages through high-volume TCPA filings, with particular focus on political campaigns, automated marketing operations, and organizations that purchase voter files containing cell phone numbers never intended for commercial or political solicitation.

Legal commentators, defense firms, and federal courts have taken notice of Olson’s litigation activity. He is frequently cited in cases where campaigns claim their texts are sent by volunteers, a practice known as P2P messaging. His litigation helped establish that if a volunteer is simply clicking a button to launch a pre-written message to a list they did not personally create, that action may still trigger TCPA liability under certain state and federal interpretations. The evidence supports an accurate description: an aggressive serial litigator who has made political campaigns and automated marketers his primary targets.

Important Distinction: Three Different Cody Olsons

As of May 2026, the name Cody Olson is tied to three completely different people caught up in entirely different legal situations. Distinguishing between them is essential.

The first is Cody Olson of Hennepin County, Minnesota, a serial TCPA litigator and plaintiff who is the subject of this profile and who sued the Bernie 2020 campaign. The second is Cody Olson of Claresholm and Calgary, Alberta, Canada, an associate attorney at Walsh LLP practicing commercial law, estates, and farming matters, who has no connection whatsoever to TCPA litigation and is simply a different person in a different country. The third is Cody Brian Olson of Dallas, Texas, a federal criminal defendant who entered a guilty plea in 2022, a case entirely unrelated to TCPA litigation.

This profile focuses exclusively on Cody Olson of Hennepin County, Minnesota, the serial TCPA litigator who sued the Bernie Sanders campaign. The other two individuals, the Canadian attorney and the Texas criminal defendant, are completely unrelated people who happen to share the same name, and neither should be confused with the TCPA serial litigator profiled here.

Who Is Cody Olson (Minnesota)? A Serial TCPA Litigator Targeting Political Campaigns

Cody Olson is a Hennepin County, Minnesota resident and documented serial TCPA litigator who became well known in 2020 for taking on the Bernie Sanders presidential campaign. Court records confirm that Olson is an active serial plaintiff whose lawsuits center on unsolicited text message campaigns, automated telemarketing practices, and political campaign communications.

His professional profile places him in Hennepin County, Minnesota, functioning as a serial TCPA plaintiff and professional litigator. His most notable case is Buller & Olson v. Bernie 2020 Inc., filed in 2020. His preferred targets include political campaigns, automated marketing operations, and data enrichment firms. His central legal theory is that political peer-to-peer, or P2P, messaging may still trigger TCPA liability if volunteers are simply clicking buttons to send pre-written messages rather than composing and sending texts themselves.

His documented filing pattern includes several recurring elements. He has pursued claims involving unsolicited text message campaigns, Automated Telephone Dialing System, or ATDS, claims, and prerecorded call violations. He has challenged political campaign communications through P2P messaging disputes, raised voter file data enrichment claims, pursued wrong-number texting liability theories, and engaged in disputes over whether vendors or candidates bear ultimate liability.

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

Cody Olson became well known in TCPA litigation circles when he and co-plaintiff Jacob Buller sued the Bernie 2020 presidential campaign in June 2020.

The case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota under Case No. 20-cv-01368-ECT-TNL, with a filing date of June 15, 2020. The plaintiffs were Jacob Buller and Cody Olson, and the defendant was Bernie 2020 Inc. The case was assigned to Judge Eric C. Tostrud, with Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung also involved.

The Allegations

The plaintiffs alleged that they received unsolicited campaign text messages inviting them to watch a Bernie Sanders advertisement. They claimed they never consented to receive these texts. They alleged the messages were sent using automated dialing technology, and they noted that the messaging itself was standardized, varying only by inserting the recipient’s first name into an otherwise generic template.

Strategic Venue Selection

The plaintiffs appeared to be pursuing a favorable ATDS interpretation already recognized within the District of Minnesota, building on prior related political campaign litigation. The complaint referenced earlier rulings suggesting that equipment capable of generating and dialing numbers without human intervention could qualify as an ATDS, even when the numbers came from stored lists rather than being randomly generated. As defense-side commentary noted at the time, presidential campaigns quickly became major TCPA targets during the 2020 election cycle.

The Political Campaign Connection: Buller & Olson

Notably, Cody Olson was not the only Olson involved in political campaign TCPA litigation during the 2020 election cycle. The Trump campaign was separately sued by Connor Olson in a related TCPA case brought by the same law firm. Cody Olson and Jacob Buller sued Bernie 2020 Inc. using counsel that also represented Connor Olson in his suit against the Trump campaign. This overlap in representation suggested a coordinated litigation strategy aimed at presidential campaigns across the political spectrum, regardless of party.

The “Volunteer P2P” Loophole Challenge

By 2026, Cody Olson was frequently cited in litigation involving political peer-to-peer texting systems.

His core legal theory pushed directly against the standard campaign defense. Where campaigns argued that texts were manually sent by volunteers, Olson countered that volunteers were merely clicking buttons to launch pre-written scripts they had no hand in drafting. Where campaigns argued that human intervention defeats TCPA liability, Olson argued that pre-built systems and scripts may still qualify as regulated technology regardless of who presses send. And where campaigns argued that P2P systems are categorically exempt from TCPA scrutiny, Olson argued that large-scale coordinated messaging can still create liability even under a P2P framework.

This matters because political campaigns have historically relied on volunteer-driven P2P messaging specifically to avoid TCPA scrutiny. Olson’s litigation challenged that underlying assumption by arguing that mass-texting platforms remain functionally automated even when a human volunteer presses the send button. His cases have helped place political campaigns under greater compliance pressure regarding consent practices, texting workflows, and the degree of automation built into their messaging systems.

The “Source of Data” Expansion (2026)

By early 2026, Olson’s litigation had expanded into challenges involving voter file sourcing and data enrichment practices.

Several key issues emerged from this expansion. Campaigns routinely purchase large databases containing voter information. Third-party vendors then enrich those records by appending mobile numbers that were not originally part of the voter file. Recipients of these enriched contact lists often never consented to political text outreach in the first place. And as a result, non-commercial entities, including political organizations, are increasingly facing TCPA and Do Not Call scrutiny that they may not have anticipated.

Olson’s recent litigation activity reflects a pattern of targeting the data ecosystem behind political messaging rather than limiting his focus solely to the messaging itself.

Olson v. Grassroots Targeting, LLC (2025)

In 2025, Cody Olson sued Grassroots Targeting, LLC, a political consulting firm involved in campaign texting operations. The defendant was Grassroots Targeting, LLC, and the central issue involved wrong-number political text messages. The core legal question was whether the vendor or the candidate bears TCPA liability for such messages. The case ultimately settled in mid-2025.

The litigation focused heavily on vendor responsibility for texts sent to individuals who allegedly never opted in to receive them.

Political Campaigns as TCPA Targets

The 2020 election cycle produced a marked increase in TCPA lawsuits against political campaigns. The Trump campaign faced a suit from Connor Olson centered on ATDS use and political texting. The Bernie 2020 campaign faced the suit from Cody Olson and Jacob Buller over automated political texts. Additional campaigns faced lawsuits from multiple other plaintiffs raising consent and texting compliance concerns. Taken together, this wave of litigation demonstrated that TCPA enforcement efforts reached campaigns across the entire political spectrum.

Litigation Pattern: SMS, Political Messaging, and Data Enrichment

Olson’s litigation model centers on three major areas. The first is SMS marketing, with a focus on automated mass-texting systems. The second is political campaigns, with a focus on P2P volunteer messaging. The third is data enrichment firms, with a focus on the practice of appending mobile numbers to existing records without obtaining consent.

A recurring theme running through Olson’s cases is what might be called the “wrong number” theory, which centers on liability for messages sent to individuals who never opted in and whose numbers were allegedly obtained through data enrichment processes rather than direct consent.

How Olson Compares to Other Serial Litigators

When measured against other well-known serial litigators, Olson’s profile stands apart in several ways. His primary venue is the District of Minnesota, compared to the Western District of Pennsylvania for Stewart Abramson, the Eastern District of Pennsylvania for Andrew Perrong, and the Eastern District of Arkansas for Stanley Hastings. His target industry is political campaigns, while Abramson targets energy and solar, Perrong targets lead generation, and Hastings also targets lead generation. His signature tactic involves voter file challenges, compared to Abramson’s DNC stacking, Perrong’s broader TCPA class actions, and Hastings’s use of fake identities. Olson is also distinct in that his litigation centers heavily on P2P messaging and data enrichment claims, areas where Abramson, Perrong, and Hastings have no comparable focus.

What makes Olson unique is his concentration on political communications and voter file sourcing, rather than the traditional robocall campaigns that define most other serial TCPA litigation.

The Other Cody Olsons (Not Related)

The Cody Olson based in Alberta, Canada, is located in that province and works at the firm Walsh LLP, practicing in business law, estates, and farming-related matters, with additional professional experience in Doha, Qatar. This individual has no connection to TCPA litigation whatsoever.

The Cody Brian Olson based in Dallas, Texas, was involved in a federal criminal proceeding and entered a guilty plea in 2022. This individual is likewise entirely unrelated to TCPA litigation.

What the Olson Cases Mean for Political Campaigns

The Olson litigation series offers several major compliance lessons for campaigns, consultants, and data firms.

First, volunteer status is not absolute protection, since a human clicking send may not eliminate TCPA exposure if the underlying system is functionally automated. Second, voter files are not consent records, meaning simply possessing someone’s number does not create permission to text them. Third, data enrichment creates real exposure, since appending numbers to existing records without consent may itself trigger liability. Fourth, consultants face direct risk, as vendors can be independently sued regardless of who the underlying candidate is. Fifth, candidates also face direct risk, since campaigns cannot fully outsource their liability to third-party vendors. Sixth, wrong-number texting matters, because mistargeted messages sent to the wrong recipient can still form the basis of a valid TCPA claim.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Cody Olson a serial TCPA litigator? Yes. Court records and legal commentary identify Cody Olson of Minnesota as a serial TCPA plaintiff involved in multiple political messaging and texting disputes.

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. There is also a Canadian attorney named Cody Olson and a separate federal criminal defendant in Texas who shares the same name. Both are unrelated individuals with no connection to TCPA litigation.

What was the Bernie 2020 case about? The plaintiffs alleged that the campaign sent automated text messages without prior express consent, in violation of the TCPA.

What is the “volunteer P2P” issue? Campaigns argued that volunteers manually sent the texts, while Olson argued that volunteers were simply operating large-scale scripted messaging systems that could still trigger TCPA liability regardless of who pressed send.

What are voter file data enrichment claims? These claims involve allegations that third-party firms appended mobile numbers to voter databases without obtaining consent from the individuals involved.

What was the Grassroots Targeting case? Olson sued the consulting firm over alleged wrong-number political texts, and the matter ultimately settled in 2025.

Is Cody Olson an attorney? The public record does not clearly establish whether the Minnesota Cody Olson is a licensed attorney. The Canadian Cody Olson is a lawyer, but he is a completely different person.

Is Olson helping consumers? That depends on perspective. Supporters argue his cases have improved political texting compliance across the industry, while critics view the lawsuits as profit-driven TCPA enforcement.

Final Thoughts: The Serial Litigator Who Took on Presidential Politics

Cody Olson of Hennepin County, Minnesota is not an occasional TCPA filer. He is a documented serial litigator who has concentrated heavily on political campaigns, voter file sourcing, automated messaging systems, and data enrichment practices.

His lawsuit against the Bernie Sanders campaign helped push political texting operations squarely into the TCPA spotlight. His litigation challenged the long-standing assumption that volunteer-driven texting systems automatically avoid liability. And his focus on voter data sourcing opened an entirely new area of scrutiny involving appended mobile numbers and consent practices.

The contrast with more extreme serial litigators remains worth noting. Where some litigators have used fake identities, Olson uses his real identity throughout his cases. Where some have faced criminal allegations, Olson has no known criminal history. Where some have faced fraud accusations, Olson has faced no fraud counterclaims. And where some litigators have made admissions of deception in their filings, Olson has made none.

But Olson remains, unmistakably, a serial litigator. He targets political campaigns. He challenges mass-texting systems. He focuses on data enrichment practices. And his cases have shaped how courts, campaigns, consultants, and vendors now analyze political TCPA exposure.

The serial litigator from Minnesota took on presidential campaigns and helped reshape the legal debate surrounding political texting compliance.

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 (Minnesota) as a serial TCPA litigator and professional plaintiff is based on documented litigation activity involving political campaigns 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 with no connection to the litigation discussed in this article.