On December 23, 2025, a federal judge in Texas handed down a decision that’s already rippling through the tech world and state legislatures: the state’s ambitious new law requiring age verification and parental consent for app downloads has been blocked, just days before it was set to take effect. The Texas App Store Accountability Act—set to become law on January 1, 2026—was halted by U.S. District Judge Robert Pitman, who ruled that it likely violates the First Amendment’s protections of free speech.
The law, also known as Senate Bill 2420, was passed earlier in 2025 with overwhelming bipartisan support and signed by Governor Gregg Abbott. The measure would have forced app stores and developers to verify the age of every user before allowing them to download apps or make in-app purchases. For those under 18, parental consent would have been mandatory. The legislation also required that app marketplaces display age categories for all apps and share age information with developers, making age verification a new fixture of digital commerce in Texas.
Supporters, including the bill’s author, State Senator Angela Paxton, argued that the law was a necessary step to give parents more control over their children’s digital lives. As Paxton explained during legislative debate back in April, “What we’ve discovered is that many parents are just not aware of the massive volume of apps that are available to their kids. It gives them insight into what their kids are looking at and it just puts that back in their hands in a direct way.”
But not everyone saw it that way. The Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA), representing major tech companies like Apple and Google, sued Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in October 2025, seeking to block the law. The CCIA and a coalition of Texas students and youth advocates argued that the law imposed a “broad censorship regime,” unnecessarily restricting digital speech and access to information, even for adults. They pointed out that existing parental controls already give families flexible ways to manage children’s app usage.
Judge Pitman, presiding in Austin, sided with the critics. In his ruling, he likened the law to a scenario where every bookstore would be forced to verify the age of each customer before entry, and require parental consent before minors could browse or purchase a book. Pitman wrote that such broad restrictions were not the least restrictive means to address the state’s concerns and could not withstand constitutional scrutiny. “However compelling the policy concerns, and however widespread the agreement that the issue must be addressed, the court remains bound by the rule of law,” Pitman stated.
The judge’s analysis applied the strict scrutiny test, the toughest standard of judicial review, which is reserved for laws that restrict fundamental rights like free speech. Under this test, the government must show that a law serves a compelling state interest and is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest using the least restrictive means. According to Pitman, Texas failed to meet this high bar. He also found portions of the law unconstitutionally vague, such as provisions that would hold developers liable for “knowingly misrepresenting” age ratings without providing clear standards, and requirements for notifying users of “material changes” to app functionality without defining what counts as material.
Stephanie Joyce, who leads the CCIA’s litigation center, welcomed the decision. “The order will preserve the First Amendment rights of app stores, app developers, parents, and younger internet users,” she said. Joyce emphasized that the ruling “also protects parents’ inviolate right to use their own judgment in safeguarding their children online using the myriad tools our members provide.” The association argued that the law would have placed “burdens on app stores, developers, minors, and parents that are completely disproportionate to any harm policymakers were attempting to remedy.”
Texas officials, however, aren’t backing down. The Attorney General’s office has already filed an appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, signaling a determination to defend what they see as a common-sense measure for child protection. Supporters of the law maintain that the state has a compelling interest in shielding minors from inappropriate content and excessive screen time, especially in the age of social media and gaming. They argue that age verification is simply a logical extension of other age-based regulations in society, from alcohol sales to movie tickets.
The debate over the Texas law comes amid a global wave of concern about children’s online safety. Earlier this month, Australia became the first country to ban social media for children under 16. In the U.S., state attorneys general have sent warning letters to major AI companies—including OpenAI, Anthropic, and Replika—demanding stronger safeguards for young users. The letters cited “the rise in sycophantic and delusional outputs to users emanating from the generative artificial intelligence software,” and called for immediate action to address disturbing reports of AI interactions with children.
Meanwhile, tech giants like Apple and Google have been watching the Texas situation closely. Apple had even announced plans to roll out new developer tools and age-assurance frameworks to comply with the law, but those efforts are now on hold. The company said it would “continue to assess the situation and work within the ongoing legal process before implementing any Texas-specific requirements.” Privacy advocates have also weighed in, warning that age verification mechanisms could require the collection and transmission of sensitive personal data, introducing new risks for users of all ages.
The Texas App Store Accountability Act isn’t the only measure of its kind. Similar age verification and online safety laws have been passed or proposed in other states, including Utah and Louisiana, and Congress has debated federal legislation on the topic. These efforts reflect widespread anxiety about the effects of digital technology on children’s mental health and wellbeing. Yet, as the Texas court’s decision shows, lawmakers must tread carefully to avoid running afoul of constitutional rights.
This isn’t the first time Judge Pitman’s court has blocked Texas’s attempts to regulate digital platforms. The same court previously struck down parts of the state’s social media law, known as the Securing Children Online Through Parental Empowerment (SCOPE) Act, for similar First Amendment violations. In those cases, as in this one, the courts emphasized that any regulation of online speech must be narrowly tailored and avoid unnecessary restrictions on access to information.
For now, the preliminary injunction means that Texans won’t have to verify their age to download apps come January 1, and minors can continue to access educational, creative, and social apps without a parent’s digital permission slip. But the battle is far from over. As appeals move forward and lawmakers across the country look for ways to balance child safety with free expression, the eyes of the nation—and the tech industry—will remain fixed on Texas.
The court’s decision marks a pivotal moment in the ongoing tug-of-war between digital regulation and constitutional freedoms, setting a precedent that may influence the future of online safety laws well beyond the Lone Star State.
