States, including North Dakota, now demand age confirmation for viewing pornographic material
In a landmark decision on June 27, 2025, the United States Supreme Court upheld Texas' HB 1181, a law requiring pornography sites to verify the age of users before accessing sexually explicit content. The ruling, which was made in a 6-3 decision, establishes a legal precedent supporting state age-verification laws for online pornography as a permissible regulation under the First Amendment, focused on protecting minors.
The law, which applies to sites where more than one-third of the content is considered harmful to minors, enforces "reasonable" age verification methods, such as digital ID checks or government-issued identification. The majority opinion, authored by Justice Clarence Thomas, ruled that the law does not violate the First Amendment.
The Court applied an intermediate level of judicial scrutiny and concluded that Texas has the authority to prevent children from accessing sexually explicit material, and that any burden on adults' free speech rights is only incidental and constitutionally permissible.
The decision comes after a coalition of adult entertainment companies and the Free Speech Coalition challenged the law, arguing that it infringed on First Amendment rights by burdening adults' access to protected speech and was less effective and more intrusive than other alternatives. A federal district judge had initially blocked enforcement of the law, finding it likely unconstitutional under strict scrutiny.
However, the Supreme Court disagreed with applying strict scrutiny, opting instead for intermediate scrutiny, under which the law survived. In dissent, Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson argued for applying strict scrutiny, contending the law imposed too great a burden on free speech rights.
Notably, Texas is not alone; 18 other states have passed similar age verification laws, and this Supreme Court ruling upholds the constitutionality of such measures. The new regulations in North Dakota, which require websites containing a substantial portion of sexual material harmful to a minor on the internet to use reasonable methods like digitized identification cards or government-issued IDs for age verification, are also at the center of a Supreme Court case.
The laws in North Dakota, like those in Texas, raise significant First Amendment concerns. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has tracked that these laws have spiraled far beyond "protecting minors from porn", with states introducing age verification requirements for skincare, dating apps, and diet pills. Despite the toned-down regulations in North Dakota, concerns remain about the potential impact on constitutionally protected speech.
As Amy Bos, NetChoice's director of state and federal affairs, warned, implementing such a measure in North Dakota is likely to meet the same fate and lead to costly legal challenges without providing any real benefit to the state's residents. Bos also highlighted that age verification bills are a privacy nightmare, as companies often hold onto data they shouldn't and age verification companies still get hacked.
In summary, the Supreme Court has affirmed the constitutionality of Texas' HB 1181, establishing a legal precedent supporting state age-verification laws for online pornography as a permissible regulation under the First Amendment focused on protecting minors. However, the ruling has sparked debate and concerns about the potential impact on free speech rights and privacy.
- The ruling on Texas' HB 1181 is not only applicable to online pornography but also opens the door for similar age-verification laws in the future, as 18 other states have already passed similar legislation.
- The use of technology, such as digital ID checks or government-issued identification, for age verification is becoming increasingly common, not just in the realm of adult entertainment, but also in areas like skincare, dating apps, and diet pills.
- The tech world, including gizmodo and other industry watchdogs, is closely following these developments in education-and-self-development, as the balance between protecting minors and upholding free speech rights continues to be a contentious issue in the digital age.
