Advocacy Groups Urge SCOTUS to Enjoin Miss. Age-Verification Law
The U.S. Supreme Court should block a Mississippi age-verification statute as it violates the First Amendment, a coalition of advocacy organizations said in an amicus brief supporting NetChoice.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Privacy Daily provides accurate coverage of newsworthy developments in data protection legislation, regulation, litigation, and enforcement for privacy professionals responsible for ensuring effective organizational data privacy compliance.
On Monday, NetChoice submitted a motion that asked SCOTUS to reinstate a preliminary injunction against HB-1126 (see 2507210072). Days earlier, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted a stay of the statute without explanation (see 2507170019).
"Mississippi has an undisputed interest in the well-being of its youth, but it must serve that interest within constitutional bounds," said the amicus brief, which was filed Friday.
The Foundation for Individual Rights in Expression led a coalition for the brief that included the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Center for Democracy & Technology and the National Coalition Against Censorship. The groups allege that the law "impermissibly discriminates against speech on the basis of its content and violates the First Amendment rights of adults and minors alike."
Mississippi's law "restricts the First Amendment rights of both the providers and users of social media platforms but fails to satisfy any level of constitutional review," the brief said. Accordingly, the court must "vacate the Fifth Circuit’s stay of the preliminary injunction against H.B. 1126’s enforcement, so that Mississippians will continue to enjoy full exercise of their First Amendment rights during the pendency of this case."
In addition, the brief argues the Supreme Court's recent decision in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton (see 2506270041) lacks bearing on this case.
The U.S. District Court for Southern Mississippi has twice enjoined HB-1126 for being too broad to survive a First Amendment challenge (see 2407010062 and 2506180051), but Attorney General Lynn Fitch (R) appealed the ruling in late June (see 2506200009).