Overview
On Christmas Eve 2024, a federal judge blocked Texas from forcing Apple and Google to verify every user's age before they could download apps. It was the latest casualty in a nationwide wave of age verification laws—over half of U.S. states passed them in two years—that kept running into the same problem: judges said they violated the First Amendment.
The collision has created a split-screen reality. In June 2025, the Supreme Court said Texas could force porn sites to check IDs. But courts have killed nearly identical laws for social media and app stores. The distinction: what counts as obscenity versus protected speech. At stake is who controls the internet's front door—parents, states, or tech platforms—and whether protecting children requires adults to surrender anonymity online.
Key Indicators
People Involved
Organizations Involved
Tech industry trade group whose members include Meta, Google, and X, fighting age verification laws nationwide.
International tech trade group representing app store operators in the Texas case.
Digital civil liberties group opposing online age verification as a privacy and free speech threat.
Timeline
-
Supreme Court allows Mississippi social media law to proceed
LegalCourt refuses to block Fifth Circuit decision lifting injunction against state's social media age verification law.
-
Supreme Court upholds Texas porn age verification 6-3
LegalJustice Thomas writes majority applying intermediate scrutiny; breaks from Reno v. ACLU precedent for obscene content.
-
NetChoice secures permanent injunctions in Arkansas and Ohio
LegalFederal courts permanently block social media age verification laws in both states.
-
California Age-Appropriate Design Code blocked again
LegalDistrict court grants third preliminary injunction, finding content-based restrictions likely fail strict scrutiny.
-
Supreme Court hears oral arguments in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton
LegalJustices question attorneys on whether porn age verification violates First Amendment.
-
Federal judge blocks Texas app store law
LegalJudge Robert Pitman grants CCIA's preliminary injunction against SB 2420, finding First Amendment violation.
-
NetChoice wins permanent block of Louisiana law
LegalFederal judge finds Louisiana's social media age verification law unconstitutionally vague.
-
Ninth Circuit partially blocks California Age-Appropriate Design Code
LegalAppeals court upholds injunction on data protection impact assessments, vacates rest, remands for detailed review.
-
Fifth Circuit upholds Texas porn age verification
LegalAppeals court reverses district court, finding HB 1181 constitutional under rational basis review.
-
Ohio law temporarily blocked
LegalChief Judge Algenon L. Marbley grants temporary restraining order against Ohio law.
-
Federal court blocks Arkansas law hours before effective date
LegalJudge Timothy L. Brooks issues preliminary injunction, finding law unconstitutionally restricts speech.
-
Ohio passes Parental Notification by Social Media Operators Act
LegislationLaw requires platforms to verify users are 16+ and obtain parental consent for younger users.
-
NetChoice sues Arkansas
LegalTech trade group files First Amendment challenge to Social Media Safety Act.
-
Utah SB 287 takes effect
LegislationUtah becomes early adopter with age verification law for adult content sites.
-
Arkansas passes Social Media Safety Act
LegislationGovernor Sarah Huckabee Sanders signs Act 689 requiring social media age verification and parental consent for minors.
-
Louisiana becomes first state with porn age verification law
LegislationLouisiana's law takes effect, requiring age verification for websites where over one-third of content is sexually explicit material harmful to minors.
Scenarios
Fifth Circuit Reverses Texas App Store Ruling, Creating Circuit Split
Discussed by: Legal analysts at Hunton Andrews Kurth, TechPolicy.Press, constitutional law scholars
Texas appeals Judge Pitman's injunction to the Fifth Circuit, which has already shown willingness to uphold age verification laws in the porn case. The appeals court distinguishes app stores from social media, noting Apple and Google already collect user ages for child accounts. It rules that SB 2420 passes intermediate scrutiny because it regulates distribution channels, not content. This conflicts with Ninth Circuit rulings blocking California's design code, setting up a Supreme Court showdown on whether app stores are more like bookstores (protected) or liquor stores (regulable).
Supreme Court Draws Line: Obscenity Yes, Social Media No
Discussed by: EFF, ACLU, First Amendment scholars analyzing Free Speech Coalition opinion
The Supreme Court clarifies that its Free Speech Coalition decision applies only to obscene content, not general speech platforms. Writing for a 5-4 majority, Chief Justice Roberts holds that social media and app stores host constitutionally protected speech and cannot be subject to blanket age verification. The Court distinguishes between age-gating specific harmful content (allowed) and requiring ID to access general platforms (unconstitutional). States must use less restrictive means like improved parental controls and platform-level filtering. This kills the current wave of state laws but invites narrower regulations.
Tech Platforms Preempt Regulation with Universal Age Verification
Discussed by: Industry watchers at TechCrunch, Meta public statements, Apple developer documentation
Facing a patchwork of state laws and uncertain court rulings, Apple and Google implement optional age verification at the account level—not per app. Parents can verify children's ages once during account setup, enabling built-in parental controls. Meta, X, and other platforms follow suit. States declare victory, tech companies avoid the worst-case scenario of per-download ID checks, and civil liberties groups grudgingly accept the compromise. The voluntary system becomes the de facto standard, making state laws redundant. Courts dismiss pending cases as moot.
Congress Passes Federal Framework, Preempting State Laws
Discussed by: Congressional testimony from child safety advocates, federal legislation trackers
Bipartisan frustration with the legal chaos leads Congress to pass a federal age verification standard. The law creates a safe harbor for platforms using approved age estimation technology (facial analysis, device signals) instead of collecting government IDs. It preempts conflicting state laws and limits liability for platforms acting in good faith. Privacy advocates hate it, but tech platforms prefer one federal rule to fifty state ones. Implementation struggles follow, but the Supreme Court upholds it 7-2, finding it content-neutral and narrowly tailored.
Historical Context
Reno v. ACLU (1997) — Communications Decency Act Struck Down
1996-1997What Happened
Congress passed the Communications Decency Act to protect minors from online indecency by criminalizing transmission of obscene material to anyone under 18. The law included an affirmative defense for sites using age verification like credit cards. The Supreme Court unanimously struck it down, ruling the internet deserves the highest First Amendment protection—like print media, not broadcast TV.
Outcome
Short term: Established that online speech gets strict scrutiny; government must use least restrictive means to protect children.
Long term: Created 28-year precedent that age verification laws unconstitutionally burden adult access to lawful speech.
Why It's Relevant
Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton (2025) explicitly breaks from Reno by applying intermediate scrutiny to age verification. Justice Kagan's dissent warned this erodes adults' rights to anonymous access.
COPPA Enforcement Against Epic Games (2022)
2022What Happened
The FTC fined Epic Games $275 million for illegally collecting personal information from children under 13 without parental consent, violating the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act. Epic made it hard for parents to delete data and used dark patterns to trick kids into purchases. It remains the largest COPPA penalty ever imposed.
Outcome
Short term: Epic overhauled Fortnite's parental controls and default privacy settings for young users.
Long term: Demonstrated federal enforcement tools already exist but are inconsistently applied; states cite this gap to justify their own laws.
Why It's Relevant
State legislators argue COPPA only covers under-13 and isn't enforced aggressively enough, justifying broader age verification mandates for teens up to 18.
Utah Social Media Regulation (2023-2024)
2023-2024What Happened
Utah passed the most aggressive social media restrictions in the nation, requiring age verification, default accounts for minors, curfews blocking late-night access, and giving parents full access to kids' DMs. Before the law took effect in March 2024, Utah amended it in response to industry pressure and constitutional concerns, weakening several provisions but keeping age verification requirements.
Outcome
Short term: Utah's law influenced copycat legislation in 25+ states but faced immediate legal challenges.
Long term: Established the template for state-level regulation: verify age, mandate parental consent, restrict features for minors.
Why It's Relevant
Shows the political momentum behind protecting kids online is bipartisan and overwhelming, even when courts keep blocking the laws. Utah's revisions demonstrate states are learning to craft narrower laws that might survive scrutiny.