A Washington appeals court has unanimously upheld state spam laws. The defendant, an Oregon resident, had argued that prosecutors must prove that he knew he was sending mail to Washington. The court rejected this argument noting that he had been warned before prosecution and that the law regulated misleading behavior.
Since this case started six years ago, CAN-SPAM has pre-empted many state spam laws, but CAN-SPAM explicitly does not pre-empt state regulations of fraudulent behavior. The Washington laws in question regulated misleading subject lines and using third-party domain names, which can still be regulated by states. This ruling shows little patience for the excuse of ignorance. It seems, given a warning at least, that spamming any address puts a spammer in a state's jurisdiction.