Pelosi Campaign Forced To Pay Settlement For Sending Man ‘Harassing’ Messages


OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.

A new filing reveals that California Democrat Rep. Nancy Pelosi settled with an Illinois man and paid him $7,500 after he accused the former House Speaker of violating federal robocalling laws.

“In October 2022, a Bolingbrook, Illinois resident named Jorge Rojas filed a 13-page lawsuit in the US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois that accused the former speaker of the House and her campaign of violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991,” Business Insider reported.

“That law, which has been found to apply to text messages in addition to calls, applies restrictions to robocalling and requires telemarketers not to contact individuals who’ve placed themselves on the Do Not Call Registry,” the outlet added.

“According to the suit, Rojas received 21 texts from Pelosi’s campaign from November 2021 to July 2022 despite previously placing himself on the registry in 2008 to ‘obtain solitude from invasive and harassing telemarketing calls,'” Business Insider reported.

Rojas’s complaint began his complaint stating: “As the Supreme Court has explained, Americans passionately disagree about many things. But they are largely united in their disdain for robocalls.”

Rojas went on to argue in his lawsuit that he “experienced frustration, annoyance, irritation, and a sense that his privacy has been invaded” by the texts from Pelosi’s campaign. He added that the texts constituted “malicious, intentional, willful, reckless, wanton and negligent disregard” for his rights.


Rojas sought a minimum of $31,500 in damages from Pelosi’s campaign, including $1,500 for each text message that he received.

In February, a few months after he filed the lawsuit, Rojas moved to dismiss the suit against Pelosi.

“And according to federal campaign finance disclosures made public on Friday, the dismissal came after Rojas received a $7,500 payment marked ‘Settlement’ from Pelosi’s congressional campaign,” Insider reported.

Pelosi came under fire last month when she was among those who tweeted after former President Donald Trump was indicted by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

Pelosi’s comments to the news were likened by some to being reminiscent of Joseph Stalin and the former Soviet Union.

“The Grand Jury has acted upon the facts and the law. No one is above the law, and everyone has the right to a trial to prove innocence. Hopefully, the former President will peacefully respect the system, which grants him that right,” the former Speaker said.


In the United States, no one is required to prove their innocence. And that got her a fact check from Twitter readers who added context.

“Ms. Pelosi mistakenly says that Trump can prove his innocence at trial. Law in the US assumes the innocence of a defendant and the prosecution must prove guilt for a conviction,” the note said.

“A presumption of innocence means that any defendant in a criminal trial is assumed to be innocent until they have been proven guilty. As such, a prosecutor is required to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the person committed the crime if that person is to be convicted. To do so, proof must be shown for every single element of a crime,” Cornell University Law School said.

“The right to ‘prove innocence’? This is America, not Stalinist Russia,” Republican Missouri Senator Josh Hawley said.


“Nancy Pelosi is dead wrong here. Does she really have no clue that the burden is not on a defendant to prove their innocence at trial?” Lee Zeldin, former Republican candidate for governor of New York said.

“Wrong. So obviously wrong. Most Middle Schoolers know this—at least they used to, when civics and the Constitution was respected in schools,” former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani said. “You’re innocent until proven guilty.”

“Stalinist Pelosi. Prove innocent? It’s innocent until proven guilty, moron. Or at least used to be,” Fox News host Mark Levin said.

The grand jury determined that sufficient evidence existed to indict Trump concerning the concealment of quiet money payments made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in 2016, even though legal experts have expressed doubt about Trump’s culpability and though federal authorities passed on filing similar charges.

Test your skills with this Quiz!