Mississippi has called on the Supreme Court to maintain its restrictions on young people accessing major social media platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, and Snapchat. The state’s Attorney General, Lynn Fitch, has argued that the tech industry group contesting these restrictions has not demonstrated any significant negative outcomes from these regulations. According to Attorney General Fitch, none of the tech platforms have faced significant compliance challenges since the restrictions’ implementation over a year ago, nor have any instances been identified of platforms censoring speech or complaints regarding access.
The focal point of the dispute is House Bill 1126, which was enacted following a tragic incident involving a 16-year-old in Mississippi who was a victim of sextortion on Instagram, leading to his suicide. The law outlines that young individuals must secure parental consent to create social media accounts, and platforms must verify ages and implement strategies to shield minors from harmful contents including self-harm, bullying, and substance abuse. Civil penalties could amount to $10,000 per violation, with possible criminal charges.
NetChoice, a tech industry group, has legally contested this regulation, positing it breaches the First Amendment. U.S. District Judge Halil Suleyman Ozerden had temporarily restrained the state from enforcing the measure, recognizing the state’s interest in safeguarding minors online but opining that the law’s breadth infringes on constitutional rights. NetChoice provides evidence of existing parental tools that manage children’s online presence without the need for such extensive state intervention.
The contention is currently in the appellate phase at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, which temporarily lifted the previous restraint on enforcement by Judge Ozerden. In response, NetChoice approached the Supreme Court, appealing for intervention.
NetChoice asserts that Mississippi should not alter the status quo of internet access without a definitive judicial clarification on why Mississippi’s law aligns with the First Amendment, especially considering established judicial concerns over such legislative measures. Fitch, however, insists that Mississippi should not be constrained by the ongoing legal contest and maintains that the law aligns with the First Amendment under a standard of intermediate scrutiny.
For further details, the original source can be found on SCOTUSblog.