The U.S. Supreme Court has declined an emergency plea to block a contentious law in Mississippi that requires verification of social media users' ages, as the Washington Examiner reports, with Justice Brett Kavanaugh weighing in with particular force.
This decision permits the law to remain in force while challenges against it proceed in lower courts.
The legislation in question, known as the Walker Montgomery Protecting Children Online Act, mandates that social media platforms must verify the age of users, necessitating parental consent for those under 18. Designed with the intent of protecting minors, it has sparked debates on privacy and access rights.
The Supreme Court's order came unsigned and without dissent. However, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, in a separate opinion, pinpointed the law's constitutional vulnerability, indicating that it may well be unconstitutional under present legal standards.
Despite Kavanaugh's opinion, he maintained that NetChoice, the trade group challenging the law, had not sufficiently evidenced that the balance of harms and equities presently tilts in its favor. As a result, the law stands.
NetChoice enjoyed a brief legal triumph when a federal district court granted it a preliminary injunction in June, sidelining the law. Yet, the momentum shifted when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit stayed this injunction in July, a decision that lacked detailed justification.
Following the appellate court's move, NetChoice submitted a petition to the Supreme Court, seeking to reinstate the injunction and highlight the broader constitutional concerns at play. In its appeal, NetChoice argued that the Fifth Circuit's decision could drastically alter how Mississippi residents engage with online content. They asserted that the law imposes significant barriers, jeopardizing free speech and internet accessibility as recognized by the courts.
Justice Kavanaugh's concurrence, while denying immediate relief, provides a silver lining for NetChoice and its allies. He reiterated the potential constitutional breaches posed by the state law, signaling that future legal scrutiny could favor NetChoice's position.
Paul Taske, Co-Director of the NetChoice Litigation Center, reflected on the mixed news with optimism despite their current setback. He emphasized their ultimate confidence based on Kavanaugh’s stance regarding the First Amendment. NetChoice's ongoing legal battles extend beyond this case, as they seek to defend freedom of speech in various contexts involving age verification laws nationwide. They foresee leveraging Kavanaugh's observations to bolster their broader legal strategies.
Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch, representing the state's stance, defended the law’s intent and opposed NetChoice’s plea for Supreme Court intervention. She argued that the group's request did not satisfy the standards necessary for such high-level judicial review.
Fitch contended that NetChoice failed to demonstrate that the appellate court’s stay was clearly erroneous. She also questioned whether the Supreme Court would even review an anticipated decision from the Fifth Circuit that might reject the injunction. The law's supporters underscore its aim to shield young people on digital platforms. They argue it balances parental rights with digital safety, albeit amidst complex legal challenges.
While the immediate outcome favors Mississippi, the legal journey appears far from over. The case will continue through the lower courts, where constitutional arguments will take center stage once more.
For now, platforms face immediate compliance requirements under Mississippi's law, ushering in operational adjustments for social media companies. The decision also raises broader questions about state-level power to regulate digital spaces. As NetChoice prepares for further rounds in court, the broader implications for free speech and digital access are poised to capture national attention.
