Mississippi residents will still have to prove their age before scrolling through Facebook, Instagram, X or even social media sites like Nextdoor. The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday let the state’s new social media age-verification law stand — at least for now — as it rejected an emergency request from tech industry group NetChoice.
The reprieve may be short-lived, however.
Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.
Point phone camera here
While concurring with Thursday’s majority decision, Justice Brett Kavanaugh predicted that NetChoice, a tech industry trade group, is likely to eventually win its case, based on the Supreme Court’s past free speech rulings.
Kavanaugh pointed to Supreme Court opinions and decisions from lower courts that struck down similar laws in other states. Under those precedents, he said, Mississippi’s measure is “likely unconstitutional.”
Law inspired by teen’s death in sextortion case
The law, passed in 2024, is part of a broader push by states to limit minors’ access to social media. It stems from House Bill 1126, enacted after a Mississippi teenager died by suicide following a sextortion scheme on Instagram.
Under the law, all users must verify their age before creating or using a social media account, and parents must give permission before their children can do so. The responsibility then falls on tech companies to confirm users’ ages and shield minors from harmful or inappropriate content.
Companies that fail to comply could face civil fines of up to $10,000 per violation, along with potential criminal penalties.
Tech group argues minors have free speech rights
NetChoice, which represents companies including YouTube and Meta, sued Mississippi in federal court, arguing the law violates the First Amendment. The group told the court that minors, like adults, are protected by the Constitution’s free speech guarantees.
“As NetChoice has seen in other states, mandating age verification and parental consent for digital services violates privacy and stifles the free exchange of ideas,” the group said.
U.S. District Judge Halil Suleyman Ozerden sided with NetChoice earlier this summer, temporarily blocking Mississippi from enforcing the law. Ozerden acknowledged the state’s interest in protecting minors online but said the measure likely violates the First Amendment. NetChoice, he added, showed evidence that parents already have tools to monitor and limit their children’s online activity.
The state appealed to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which on July 17 temporarily put Ozerden’s ruling on hold while the case moves forward.
Days later, on July 21, NetChoice filed an emergency petition asking the Supreme Court to step in. The group argued that Mississippi should not be allowed to reshape internet access before a judge fully explains why its approach does not violate free speech protections and why it differs from other courts that have struck down similar laws.
Attorney general defends enforcement record
Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch asked the Supreme Court to keep the law in effect while the case plays out. She argued that the measure has been enforced for more than a year on other social media platforms without a single complaint about access, censorship or companies struggling to comply.
NetChoice’s challenge will continue to play out in the lower courts.
“Although we’re disappointed with the Court’s decision, Justice Kavanaugh’s concurrence makes clear that NetChoice will ultimately succeed in defending the First Amendment — not just in this case but across all NetChoice’s ID-for-Speech lawsuits,” Paul Taske, co-director of the NetChoice Litigation Center, said.
