Federal Judge Blocks Arkansas Law Requiring Parental Consent for Social Media Access
In a groundbreaking ruling, a federal judge has blocked an Arkansas law that would have required children under 18 to obtain parental consent before accessing popular social media websites. Judge Timothy Brooks of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas granted a request from tech lobbying group NetChoice to halt the law from going into effect on September 1. NetChoice, which counts Meta, Google, and TikTok among its members, sued the state’s attorney general, arguing that the law violates the First Amendment.
Judge Brooks stated in his 50-page ruling that NetChoice is likely to succeed in proving that the law is unconstitutionally vague and fails to clearly define which platforms are subject to it. He further asserted that the law would impede both minors’ and adults’ access to speech. By requiring adult users to comply with age-verification requirements and provide state-approved documents to access platforms, the law imposes significant burdens on their ability to view constitutionally protected speech. While acknowledging the state’s aim of ensuring internet safety for children, Judge Brooks concluded that it does not justify suppressing adult speech. He also found that the law is not specifically tailored to address the state’s claims of online harms towards children.
The ruling marks a significant victory for NetChoice as the judge found that the law potentially infringes upon the public’s First Amendment rights. Chris Marchese, Director of NetChoice’s litigation center, expressed satisfaction with the decision, stating that they are pleased the court sided with the First Amendment and prevented Arkansas’ unconstitutional law from censoring free speech online and compromising the privacy of Arkansans, their families, and their businesses. Marchese further emphasized that NetChoice looks forward to the law being permanently struck down.
The case in Arkansas reflects a broader trend among several states that have passed laws seeking to restrict children and teenagers’ access to social media. This victory for NetChoice in Arkansas could have ramifications for Utah and Louisiana, which have enacted similar legislation. At the federal level, a bipartisan bill has also been introduced aiming to prohibit children under 13 from using social media. However, this bill has not advanced in committee or garnered widespread support.
The Arkansas law, signed into effect by Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders in April, would have required social media platforms to enlist third-party companies to verify the ages of their users. Notably, several major tech companies, including YouTube, LinkedIn, Google, and Amazon, were exempt from the law after undisclosed lobbying campaigns. Additionally, the law does not apply to social media platforms with less than $100 million in annual revenue.
Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin expressed disappointment with the ruling and affirmed his commitment to defending the law to protect children—an interest recognized by the federal judge’s order. Griffin has the option to appeal the decision to the 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, although his office has not disclosed their next steps.
Recognizing the urgency of the matter and the short window for compliance, NetChoice sought an expedited decision to prevent the law from taking effect. The group argued that the law posed a threat to the safety and privacy of Arkansans by requiring social media companies like Meta and TikTok to cooperate with external groups in collecting users’ ages for verification.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, both civil liberties organizations, filed a supporting brief backing NetChoice’s injunction request. They contended that the law would have infringed upon the free speech protections afforded to both children and adults on social media.
As the legal battle continues, the outcome in Arkansas has set a significant precedent concerning the delicate balance between protecting children online and upholding constitutional rights. The implications of this ruling may reverberate across the country as other states grapple with similar legislative efforts to regulate social media access for young individuals.
