Supreme Court upholds Texas's porn site age verification law
The US Supreme Court has upheld a Texas law that could have broad implications for online free speech. The court ruled 6-3 in affirming Texas law HB 1181, which requires websites that host adult content to implement age verification.
The nonprofit Free Speech Coalition petitioned the top court in April 2024 to review the law. Texas was only one of many states passing age-verification laws aimed at porn websites.
Critics across the political spectrum have noted HB 1181 has concerning implications for the First Amendment and online privacy. The EFF notes that no age verification method exists that is both accurate and respects user privacy. (Unlike flashing an ID in person, online verification requires data retention.)
Developing...
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
27 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Supreme Court's Porn Ruling Continues the Conservative Revolution
In a landmark 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court upheld age-verification requirements for accessing online pornography sites, effectively overturning a precedent that had stood for more than 20 years. Alongside its January decision on TikTok, the ruling marks a new era in the court's online First Amendment jurisprudence: the justices are increasingly willing to uphold government suppression of free speech for policy reasons. The opinion in the case, Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, was written by Justice Clarence Thomas, who, until recently, was something of a free speech absolutist. Thomas made it extremely clear that his goal was to find a way to uphold the Texas age-verification law at issue, regardless of precedent.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
US Department of Justice sues Washington over ‘anti-Catholic' law
PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) – The United States Department of Justice is suing the State of Washington over a new law some have deemed 'anti-Catholic.' The lawsuit stems from , which requires clergy members to report child abuse and neglect, even if the information is shared with a priest during confession. The bill was signed into law by Washington Governor Bob Ferguson in May and takes effect July 27. On Monday, The DOJ filed a motion to intervene — or a motion to join — an existing lawsuit against the state that was filed by the Archdiocese of Seattle. These are the Pacific Northwest wines that won big at the 2025 Decanter World Wine Awards The DOJ argues that the Washington state law violates the free exercise of religion for all Catholics because it requires priests to break the confidentiality seal of confession, which could lead priests to be excommunicated from the Catholic Church. The DOJ claims this violates the First Amendment right to free exercise of religion and the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. 'Laws that explicitly target religious practices such as the Sacrament of Confession in the Catholic Church have no place in our society,' said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division. Oregon appeals court finds gun forensics method is not 'scientifically valid' 'Senate Bill 5375 unconstitutionally forces Catholic priests in Washington to choose between their obligations to the Catholic Church and their penitents or face criminal consequences, while treating the priest-penitent privilege differently than other well-settled privileges. The Justice Department will not sit idly by when States mount attacks on the free exercise of religion,' Dhillon added. The Justice Department's motion to intervene is pending before the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington in Tacoma. In a statement to KOIN 6 News in response to the DOJ's suit, Governor Ferguson said, 'It is disappointing, but not surprising, to see the DOJ seek to shield and protect child abusers.' Close Thanks for signing up! Watch for us in your inbox. Subscribe Now A spokesperson for Washington Attorney General Nick Brown told KOIN 6 News that Brown's office does not comment on most pending litigation, noting they are reviewing the complaint and will respond in court. Washington State Senator Noel Frame (D-Seattle), who is the prime sponsor of SB 5375, added, 'We must take every step possible to make sure kids are safe. That's why I championed this bill and that's why it passed with bipartisan support. This law brings us in line with the majority of other states that require clergy to be mandatory reporters of abuse and neglect. We also join six other states – including Texas and Oklahoma – that require the reporting of abuse learned during penitential communication, including confession.' 'Whether you're from a red state or a blue state, keeping kids safe from abuse should be a non-partisan issue,' Frame continued. Portland bar hosts 'In Bed By 10' happy hour DJ parties The DOJ's filing comes after the Archdiocese of Seattle filed a lawsuit against Washington over the law, with Archbishop Paul D. Etienne releasing a statement in May threatening to excommunicate Catholic clergy who follow the law. Archbishop Etienne cited Acts 5:29, 'We must obey God rather than men,' saying, 'this is our stance now in the face of this new law. Catholic clergy may not violate the seal of confession – or they will be excommunicated from the Church. All Catholics must know and be assured that their confessions remain sacred, secure, confidential and protected by the law of the Church.' The Archbishop added that the church agrees with protecting children and preventing child abuse, noting the Archdiocese of Seattle already has mandatory reporter policies for priests. However, those rules don't apply to information received during confession. 'Transformational partnership': Pac-12 reaches deal with CBS for football, men's basketball games 'During Confession, penitent Catholics confess aloud their sins to a Catholic priest, asking God for forgiveness,' the lawsuit argues. 'The seal of confidentiality is, therefore, the lifeblood of Confession. Without it, the free exercise of the Catholic religion, i.e. the apostolic duties performed by the Catholic priest to the benefit of Catholic parishioners, cannot take place.' Meanwhile, others argue that the law is not 'anti-Catholic,' rather, the law is focused on protecting children and getting abusers off the streets. In a phone call with KOIN 6 News, Mary Dispenza — representing the Pacific Northwest branch of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests — said it is 'absurd that they would file a suit' because SB 5375 is advocating to protect children. 'It's hard for me to believe that a bishop would file a suit,' Dispenza said, adding that the bill 'is not anti-Catholic. It's the best of Catholicism.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
8 hours ago
- Yahoo
US Supreme Court upholds Texas age-check for porn sites
The US Supreme Court on Friday upheld a Texas law requiring pornographic websites to verify visitors' ages, rejecting arguments that this violates free speech and boosting efforts to protect children from online sexual content. The court's decision will impact a raft of similar laws nationwide and could set the direction for internet speech regulation as concerns about the impact of digital life on society grow. Texas is one of about 20 US states to institute checks that porn viewers are over 18, which critics argue violate First Amendment free speech rights. Britain and Germany also enforce age-related access restrictions to adult websites, while a similar policy in France was blocked by the courts a week ago. US companies like Meta, meanwhile, are lobbying Washington lawmakers for age-based verification to be carried out by smartphone giants Apple and Google on their app stores. The Texas law was passed in 2023 by the state's Republican-majority legislature but was initially blocked after a challenge by an adult entertainment industry trade association. A federal district court sided with the trade group, the Free Speech Coalition, saying the law restricted adults' access to constitutionally protected content. But a conservative-dominated appeals court upheld the age verification requirement, prompting the pornography trade group to take its case to the Supreme Court, where conservatives have a 6-3 supermajority. Under the law, companies that fail to properly verify users' ages face fines up to $10,000 per day and up to $250,000 if a child is exposed to pornographic content as a result. To protect privacy, the websites aren't allowed to retain any identifying information obtained from users when verifying ages, and doing so could cost companies $10,000 daily in fines. During arguments in January before the Supreme Court, a lawyer representing the Free Speech Coalition said the law was "overly burdensome" and that its goal could be accomplished using content filtering programs. But Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the mother of seven children, took issue with the efficacy of content filtering, saying that from personal experience as a parent, such programs were difficult to maintain across the many types of devices used by kids. Barrett also asked the lawyer to explain why requesting age verification online is any different than doing so at a movie theater that displays pornographic movies. The lawyer for the Free Speech Coalition -- which includes the popular website Pornhub that has blocked all access in some states with age verification laws -- said online verification was different as it leaves a "permanent record" that could be a target for hackers. During the court's hearing of the case in January, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Clarence Thomas, both Republican appointees, seemed to suggest that advances in technology might justify reviewing online free speech cases. In 1997, the Supreme Court struck down, in an overwhelming 7-2 decision, a federal online age-verification law in what became a landmark free speech case that set a major precedent for the internet age. arp/sms/bgs
