logo
US Supreme Court upholds Texas age-check for porn sites

US Supreme Court upholds Texas age-check for porn sites

France 2420 hours ago

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.
Other countries such as France, Britain and Germany also enforce age-related access restrictions to adult websites, while companies like Meta 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.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Record crowds expected at Budapest Pride march in defiance of Orban's ban
Record crowds expected at Budapest Pride march in defiance of Orban's ban

France 24

time5 hours ago

  • France 24

Record crowds expected at Budapest Pride march in defiance of Orban's ban

A record number of people are expected to attend Saturday's Pride march in the Hungarian capital Budapest, defying a ban that marks an unprecedented regression of LGBTQ rights in the European Union. Prime Minister Viktor Orban 's ruling coalition amended laws and the constitution earlier this year to prohibit the annual celebration, justifying his years-long clampdown on LGBTQ rights on "child protection" grounds. While Orban has been emboldened by the anti-diversity offensive of US President Donald Trump, his own initiatives have drawn protests at home and condemnation from the EU and rights groups. The nationalist leader on Friday said that while police would not "break up" the 30th edition of the Pride march, those who took part should be aware of "legal consequences". Despite the risk of a fine, more than 35,000 people are expected to gather at 2:00 pm (1200 GMT) near Budapest's city hall, an hour before the march begins. Ministers from several EU countries, and dozens of European lawmakers are expected to attend in defiance of the ban, reminiscent of that in Moscow in 2006 and Istanbul in 2015. "We're not just standing up for ourselves... If this law isn't overturned, eastern Europe could face a wave of similar measures," Pride organiser Viktoria Radvanyi said. Freshly installed cameras Earlier this week, EU chief Ursula von der Leyen called on the Hungarian authorities to reverse the ban. Thirty-three countries have also spoken up in support of the march. While parade organisers risk up to a year in prison, attendees can face fines up to 500 euros ($580). The latest legal changes empower the authorities to use facial-recognition technology to identify those who take part. Freshly installed cameras have appeared on lamp posts along the planned route of the march. However, opposition Budapest mayor Gergely Karacsony has insisted that no attendee can face any reprisals as the march -- co-organised by the city hall this time -- is a municipal event and does not require police approval. "The police have only one task tomorrow, and it is a serious one: to ensure the safety of Hungarian and European citizens attending the event," Karacsony said during a briefing with visiting EU equalities commissioner Hadja Lahbib. Far-right groups have announced multiple counterprotests along the planned route of the procession. Justice Minister Bence Tuzson this week sent a letter to EU embassies cautioning diplomats and staff against participating because of the police ban.

Iran holds state funeral for top brass slain in war with Israel
Iran holds state funeral for top brass slain in war with Israel

France 24

time8 hours ago

  • France 24

Iran holds state funeral for top brass slain in war with Israel

The United States had carried out strikes on three Iranian nuclear sites last weekend, joining its ally Israel's bombardments of Iran's nuclear programme in the 12-day conflict launched on June 13. Both Israel and Iran claimed victory in the war that ended with a ceasefire, with Iranian leader Khamenei downplaying the US strikes as having done "nothing significant". In a tirade on his Truth Social platform, Trump blasted Tehran Friday for claiming to have won the war. He also claimed to have known "EXACTLY where he (Khamenei) was sheltered, and would not let Israel, or the U.S. Armed Forces... terminate his life". "I SAVED HIM FROM A VERY UGLY AND IGNOMINIOUS DEATH, and he does not have to say, 'THANK YOU, PRESIDENT TRUMP!'" the US leader said. Trump added he had been working in recent days on the possible removal of sanctions against Iran, one of Tehran's main demands. "But no, instead I get hit with a statement of anger, hatred, and disgust, and immediately dropped all work on sanction relief, and more," Trump said. Hitting back at Trump Saturday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi condemned the Republican president's comments on Khamenei. "If President Trump is genuine about wanting a deal, he should put aside the disrespectful and unacceptable tone towards Iran's Supreme Leader, Grand Ayatollah Khamenei," Araghchi posted on social media platform X. "The Great and Powerful Iranian People, who showed the world that the Israeli regime had NO CHOICE but to RUN to 'Daddy' to avoid being flattened by our Missiles, do not take kindly to Threats and Insults." The Israeli strikes on Iran killed at least 627 civilians, Tehran's health ministry said. Iran's attacks on Israel killed 28 people, according to Israeli figures. 'Historic' state funeral The state funeral proceedings in Tehran for 60 nuclear scientists and military commanders killed in Israeli strikes were set to begin at 8:00 am (0430 GMT). Iranian media broadcast the first images of the proceedings early Saturday for the "martyrs of the war imposed by the Zionist regime". Footage showed coffins draped in Iranian flags and bearing portraits of the slain commanders in uniform near Enghelab Square where a ceremony is due to take place. It will be followed by a funeral procession to Azadi Square, about 11 kilometres (seven miles) across the sprawling metropolis. Mohsen Mahmoudi, head of Tehran's Islamic Development Coordination Council, vowed it would be a "historic day for Islamic Iran and the revolution". Among the dead is Mohammad Bagheri, a major general in Iran's Revolutionary Guards and the second-in-command of the armed forces after the Iranian leader. He will be buried alongside his wife and daughter, a journalist for a local media outlet, all killed in an Israeli attack. Nuclear scientist Mohammad Mehdi Tehranchi, also killed in the attacks, will be buried with his wife. Revolutionary Guards commander Hossein Salami, who was killed on the first day of the war, will also be laid to rest after Saturday's ceremony -- which will also honour at least 30 other top commanders. Of the 60 people who are to be laid to rest after the ceremony, four are children. 'Imminent threat' During his first term in office, Trump pulled out in 2018 of a landmark nuclear deal -- negotiated by former US president Barack Obama. The deal that Trump had abandoned aimed to make it practically impossible for Iran to build an atomic bomb, while at the same time allowing it to pursue a civil nuclear programme. Iran, which insists its nuclear programme is only for civilian purposes, stepped up its activities after Trump withdrew from the agreement. After the US strikes, Trump said negotiations for a new deal were set to begin next week. But Tehran denied a resumption, and leader Khamenei said Trump had "exaggerated events in unusual ways", rejecting US claims Iran's nuclear programme had been set back by decades. Israel had claimed it had "thwarted Iran's nuclear project" during the 12-day war. But its foreign minister reiterated Friday the world was obliged to stop Tehran from developing an atomic bomb. "The international community now has an obligation to prevent, through any effective means, the world's most extreme regime from obtaining the most dangerous weapon," Gideon Saar wrote on X. © 2025 AFP

US Supreme Court hands Trump 'giant' win on powers of judges
US Supreme Court hands Trump 'giant' win on powers of judges

LeMonde

time10 hours ago

  • LeMonde

US Supreme Court hands Trump 'giant' win on powers of judges

US President Donald Trump hailed a "giant win" Friday, June 27, after the Supreme Court curbed lone judges from blocking the Republican's raft of controversial policies. The 6-3 ruling, with the court's liberal justices all dissenting, stemmed from Trump's bid to end birthright citizenship. The court said individual district judges had likely exceeded their powers by issuing nationwide injunctions, which have also blocked a string of Trump's hardline policies on immigration, diversity and firing federal employees. "The Supreme Court has delivered a monumental victory for the Constitution, the separation of powers and the rule of law," 79-year-old Trump told a hastily arranged press conference at the White House. Trump said he would now proceed with "so many policies" that had been "wrongly" blocked, including stopping funding for transgender people and "sanctuary cities" for migrants. His initial reaction to the ruling came in a post on Truth Social, welcomed it as a "GIANT WIN." US Attorney General Pam Bondi, standing alongside Trump at the podium, said the ruling would stop "rogue judges striking down President Trump's policies across the entire nation." Trump separately hailed a "great ruling" by the Supreme Court to let parents opt their children out of LGBTQ-themed books at public schools. Critics say the move threatens secular education by opening the door to religious objections. 'Step toward authoritarianism' The Supreme Court did not rule on the constitutionality of Trump's executive order seeking to end automatic citizenship for children born on US soil. But the broader decision on the scope of judicial rulings removes a big roadblock to Trump's often highly contested policy agenda and has far-reaching ramifications for the ability of the judiciary to rein in Trump – or future US presidents. The Supreme Court's majority decision was authored by Justice Amy Coney Barrett, a Trump appointee, and joined by the other five conservative justices. "Federal courts do not exercise general oversight of the Executive Branch," wrote Barrett, who has previously been a frequent target of Trump loyalists over previous decisions that went against the president. The Supreme Court's three liberal justices dissented. Justice Sonia Sotomayor said the ruling was "nothing less than an open invitation for the government to bypass the constitution." Democrats swiftly blasted the decision, saying it would embolden Trump as he pushes the boundaries of presidential power in his second term. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer called it a "terrifying step toward authoritarianism." Trump, however, rejected concerns about the concentration of power in the White House. "This is really the opposite of that," Trump said. "This really brings back the Constitution." Partner service Learn French with Gymglish Thanks to a daily lesson, an original story and a personalized correction, in 15 minutes per day. Try for free Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship is just one of a number of his moves that have been blocked by district court judges around the country – both Democratic and Republican appointees - since he took office in January. 'Lawless actions' Past presidents have also complained about national injunctions shackling their agenda. But such orders have sharply risen under Trump, who saw more in his first two months than Democrat Joe Biden did during his first three years in office. The case was ostensibly about Trump's executive order ending birthright citizenship, which was deemed unconstitutional by courts in Maryland, Massachusetts and Washington state. But it actually focused on whether a single federal district court judge has the right to issue a nationwide block to a presidential decree with a universal injunction. The issue has become a rallying cry for Trump and his Republican allies, who accuse the judiciary of impeding his agenda against the will of voters. Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship decrees that children born to parents in the United States illegally or on temporary visas would not automatically become citizens. Trump said that the policy "was meant for the babies of slaves," dating back to the US Civil War era in the mid 1800s.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store