FOLLOW US

Ohio’s controversial law requiring social media companies to obtain parental consent before allowing children under 16 to create accounts has been struck down. A federal judge ruled that the law, known as the Parental Notification by Social Media Operators Act, “fails to pass constitutional muster” and is in violation of the First Amendment.

U.S. District Judge Algenon L. Marbley issued an order on Wednesday blocking the state from enforcing the law, which was originally aimed at protecting minors from potential harms associated with social media use. While the judge acknowledged the state’s noble intentions, he found that the law infringed upon the constitutional rights of children.

Judge Marbley emphasized that even well-meaning government actions must comply with the U.S. Constitution, particularly the First Amendment. He referenced a Seventh Circuit analysis which noted that young people must have access to information to form political opinions and make informed decisions, asserting that the state cannot prevent children from hearing or expressing ideas without parental consent.

The judge also criticized the evidence presented regarding social media’s harms to children, pointing out that the data merely suggested correlation, not causation. Even if protecting children from these harms were a compelling interest, Judge Marbley argued, the law was too broad and not sufficiently tailored to address the issue.

"The act is a breathtakingly blunt instrument for reducing social media's harm to children," he stated, adding that the law’s approach was either overinclusive or underinclusive in terms of the government’s objectives.

The decision follows a lawsuit filed in early 2024 by NetChoice, a trade group whose members include major social media platforms like Meta Platforms Inc. and TikTok Inc. The group argued that the law violated minors’ First Amendment rights by restricting their ability to access and engage in protected speech online.

While the law did not specifically require age verification, NetChoice contended that it was overly vague and that it required children under 16 to obtain verifiable parental consent before agreeing to terms of service or creating social media accounts.

In his ruling, Judge Marbley noted that Ohio’s response to concerns about children accessing harmful online content could not be to impose a blanket ban without parental consent, comparing the approach to forbidding children from accessing a library without a permission slip.

NetChoice is represented by Matthew H. Rice of Sperling Kenny Nachwalter LLC and a team of attorneys from Lehotsky Keller Cohn LLP, while Ohio is represented by attorneys from the Ohio Office of the Attorney General.

The case is NetChoice LLC v. Yost, case number 2:24-cv-00047, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio.