FOLLOW US

A tech industry powerhouse representing Meta, Google and other online giants has launched a high-stakes constitutional battle against Virginia, arguing that the state’s new restrictions on minors’ access to social media trample free-speech rights and threaten digital privacy.

Trade Group Moves to Block Law Set for January

NetChoice LLC filed a 41-page complaint in Virginia federal court Monday, seeking to stop Senate Bill 854 from taking effect on Jan. 1. The measure—signed by Gov. Glenn Youngkin in May—orders platforms to dramatically curb screen time for younger teens, limiting users under 16 to one hour per day unless parents explicitly approve additional time.

The lawsuit likens the law to past waves of moral panic, noting how generations once blamed books, rock music and video games for corrupting youth. Now, it says, social media is the newest target of political fear.

NetChoice Argues Law Violates First Amendment Rights

“Government Cannot Step Into the Parent’s Chair”

Calling the statute “the latest attempt to restrict constitutionally protected expression,” NetChoice argues that SB 854 unlawfully blocks minors from accessing lawful content and simultaneously censors companies trying to reach those users.

The suit anchors its argument in the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2011 ruling in Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association, which held that states cannot prevent children from expressing or receiving lawful speech without parental permission.

“Virginia may wish that more Virginians shared its own views,” the complaint states, “but it may not take matters into its own hands and restrict access itself.”

NetChoice says its member companies—Google, YouTube, Meta, Facebook, Instagram, Reddit and X—already offer parental controls, making government-imposed limits unnecessary and unconstitutional.

Lawsuit Challenges Definition of “Social Media”

The group says Virginia’s definition of “social media” is both sweeping and vague, covering platforms that allow user profiles, social interaction and shared content while excluding email, messaging and curated content apps. The lack of clarity, NetChoice argues, leaves companies guessing about how to comply and creates legal exposure without real benefits.

Privacy Risks and Identity Verification Concerns

The challenge also warns that SB 854 endangers privacy by forcing minors and parents to undergo identity verification to prove age or guardianship. Such a requirement, the suit claims, creates new entry points for cybercriminals seeking sensitive documents and personal data.

Youngkin Defends Law as Pro-Parent, Pro-Safety

Gov. Youngkin did not immediately comment on the lawsuit. Upon signing the bill in May, he promoted it on X, declaring that it would result in “more healthy, safe kids in Virginia” and “new tools empowering parents.”

Part of a National Wave of Legal Battles

The Virginia lawsuit is the latest in NetChoice’s growing resistance to state-level efforts tightening control over minors’ digital lives. The group sued Louisiana in March over similar restrictions and challenged Georgia’s youth social-media limits in May—laws that a federal judge temporarily blocked on First Amendment grounds.

Earlier this month, NetChoice secured a pause on Colorado’s requirement that platforms issue “social media health warnings” to minors. Meanwhile, TikTok, Meta and Google filed separate federal suits Friday challenging California’s new parental-consent rules for personalized content, following a Ninth Circuit decision that largely rejected NetChoice’s earlier attempt to stop the statute.

NetChoice is represented by Craig Crandall Reilly of the Law Office of Craig C. Reilly and Paul D. Clement, Erin E. Murphy, James Y. Xi and Barrett L. Anderson of Clement & Murphy PLLC.

Counsel for Virginia was not immediately available.