Supreme Court Considers Age Limit for Porn Sites in Texas

It was unclear who prevailed during oral arguments before the Supreme Court Thursday on a Texas law requiring porn sites. technologically prevent minors from accessing their pages.

HB 1181, passed in 2023, would require the owner to restrict access to a website with age verification technology if at least one-third of its content is “sexual material harmful to minors.” What form the age verification might take is open to interpretation.

The court’s conservative rulings seemed friendly to the argument that states need stronger tools to prevent minors from viewing porn, given its easy access to it on cell phones and other devices. But along with the court’s three liberal justices, they questioned Texas Solicitor General Aaron Nielsen about whether state laws can and should survive the strict standard of scrutiny the court has previously set for analyzing statutes. may limit protected forms of speech.

The porn industry, represented by the Free Speech Coalition trade association, challenged the law and won a preliminary injunction in federal district court. But the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned that decision, based on a standard known as rational basis scrutiny, which requires the party challenging the law to prove that the government had no legitimate interest in enacting the rules or that there was no reasonable connection between the laws. regulations and legitimate government interests.

Derek Shaffer, an attorney representing the Free Speech Coalition before the Supreme Court on Thursday, argued that the appeals court erred and instead should have subjected the law to a strict standard of review that would have put the burden on Texas to prove HB 1181. not only pursued compelling state interests, but was also narrowly framed and not inappropriate. it is difficult for adults.

While states have a vested interest in limiting minors’ access to pornography, Texas’ age-verification requirement could not pass the strict scrutiny test, Shaffer argued, arguing that the age-verification requirements created an enormous burden on adults. , a digital record of their visits to porn sites that can be hacked or otherwise made public. In addition, he argued, Texas failed to consider other technological solutions, such as content filtering tools for minors’ devices, that would not burden mature audiences.

Nielsen, representing the state of Texas, argued that porn sites can use biometric identifiers such as handprints or facial recognition without raising privacy concerns or unduly burdening adults. “Today, age verification is simple, secure and common, including non-identifying tools,” he said.

In their inquiry, the justices did not examine the effectiveness or privacy implications of various age verification technologies. Their review focused largely on how to interpret the court’s decades-long precedent on when to apply strict scrutiny.

“For us to apply anything less (other than strict scrutiny) would be to overturn at least five precedents,” Justice Elena Kagan said at one point.