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.
