In a pivotal decision, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear a challenge to a Texas law aimed at restricting minors’ access to internet pornography by enforcing stringent age verification measures. The law mandates the submission of government-issued IDs, a provision contested by a trade group, sexual material producers, and a performer who argue it infringes on adults’ First Amendment rights.
The legislation prohibits companies from retaining user-submitted information, yet opponents argue that requiring personal data poses risks of identity theft, surveillance, and coercion, deterring adults from accessing legal content.
Federal District Court Judge David Alan Ezra blocked the law, asserting it could allow intrusive government oversight into private lives and potentially force individuals to disclose intimate details to access protected speech.
A divided U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld the law, citing the government’s interest in preventing minors from accessing explicit materials.
Judge Jerry E. Smith, supported by Judge Jennifer W. Elrod, emphasized the rational link between age verification and safeguarding minors, contrasting with Judge Patrick E. Higginbotham’s dissent, which highlighted concerns over free speech implications and access to popular media.
Despite challenges, the Fifth Circuit’s decision was not stayed pending Supreme Court review, prompting dissent from Judge Higginbotham, who underscored the case’s significance for Supreme Court resolution, citing conflicts with precedent.
The Supreme Court’s involvement follows its refusal to block the law earlier this year. The Fifth Circuit drew on the 1968 Ginsberg v. New York decision, which allowed restrictions on minors’ access to certain sexual materials, applying a lenient form of judicial scrutiny. However, critics invoke the 2004 Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union case, where the Supreme Court applied strict scrutiny to strike down a similar federal law, highlighting inconsistencies in legal standards.
The challengers, represented by the ACLU among others, argue that the Fifth Circuit overstepped by diverging from established Supreme Court precedents. They stress the law’s potential to unjustly burden adult access to legal content while failing to address underlying concerns about internet pornography’s accessibility and impact.
Ken Paxton, Texas’ attorney general, defended the law, citing the graphic nature of online pornography and emphasizing that the law aims to ensure age-appropriate access without prohibiting production or sale. He contends that the measure aligns with constitutional principles and addresses modern challenges posed by explicit online content.