The U.S. Supreme Court has allowed Mississippi to continue enforcing a controversial law requiring age verification and parental consent for minors wishing to use social media platforms, even as a legal battle over its constitutionality continues to unfold. This decision, delivered on August 14, 2025, represents a significant moment in the ongoing national debate over how best to protect children online while safeguarding free speech rights.
The law at the center of the dispute, known officially as the Walker Montgomery Protecting Children Online Act, was enacted by Mississippi’s governor in April 2025 after passing unanimously through the state legislature. The measure mandates that social media platforms—such as Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, Snapchat, Reddit, Pinterest, and X—must obtain explicit parental consent before allowing anyone under 18 to create an account. Additionally, platforms are required to make “commercially reasonable” efforts to verify the age of all users. Failure to comply could result in civil penalties of up to $10,000 per violation, as well as potential criminal penalties under the state’s deceptive trade practices law, as reported by Reuters.
This law, however, does not apply to websites devoted to news, sports, commerce, or video games, and specifically exempts email and direct messaging services. The rationale, according to Mississippi’s Attorney General Lynn Fitch, is to protect young people from a range of online harms not covered by the First Amendment, including sexual or physical abuse, extortion, and incitement to suicide. Fitch and other state officials argue that age verification and parental consent are common-sense tools states can use to shield minors from the darker corners of the internet.
NetChoice, a Washington-based trade group representing major tech companies such as Meta (the parent company of Facebook and Instagram), Alphabet’s YouTube, and Snapchat, quickly challenged the law in federal court. In their lawsuit, filed in 2024, NetChoice contends that Mississippi’s requirements violate the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment protections against government abridgement of free speech. The group, which also represents nine social media platforms, claims the law infringes on minors’ rights to speak freely without parental control and that many platforms already offer robust parental controls and content moderation tools. “Although we’re disappointed with the Court’s decision, Justice Kavanaugh’s concurrence makes clear that NetChoice will ultimately succeed in defending the First Amendment—not just in this case but across all NetChoice’s ID-for-Speech lawsuits. This is merely an unfortunate procedural delay,” said Paul Taske, co-director of the NetChoice Litigation Center, in a statement shared with the Associated Press.
The Supreme Court’s unsigned order did not explain the justices’ reasoning for allowing the law to remain in effect while litigation continues. However, Justice Brett Kavanaugh issued a short concurring opinion, acknowledging that while the law is likely unconstitutional, NetChoice had not demonstrated the “high bar” required to block it at this early stage. “The social media companies failed to show that allowing the law to take effect would cause immediate harm,” Kavanaugh wrote, but he added that he believes the companies will “likely” succeed in their First Amendment challenge down the line.
To date, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has paused a lower court’s order that would have blocked enforcement of the law against some NetChoice members, including Meta, Instagram, Facebook, Snapchat, and YouTube. The appeals court’s one-sentence ruling, issued on July 17, 2025, gave no explanation for its decision. Until the Fifth Circuit issues a final ruling, the Supreme Court’s order means the law can be enforced, requiring anyone under 18 in Mississippi who wants to use major social media platforms to obtain parental consent and verify their age.
The broader backdrop to this case is a wave of similar legislative efforts across the United States. According to the Associated Press, approximately 12 other states have enacted laws aimed at protecting children from data collection, online predators, and other social media harms. Yet, courts in at least seven states have either preliminarily or permanently blocked such measures, reflecting the contentious and unsettled nature of this policy area. The Supreme Court itself has been increasingly asked to weigh in on when protective laws for minors cross the line into unconstitutional restrictions on speech. Just this past year, the court upheld a Texas law requiring age verification for visitors to sexually explicit websites—a move also justified as necessary to shield minors from harmful content.
Mississippi’s law is part of a growing movement among state legislatures to address mounting concerns about the impact of social media on the mental health and safety of young people. Lawmakers in Jackson, as elsewhere, cited a range of studies and anecdotal reports suggesting that excessive social media use can contribute to anxiety, depression, and exposure to bullying or predatory behavior. These concerns have fueled bipartisan support for stricter online protections for children, even as tech companies and civil liberties advocates warn of unintended consequences.
NetChoice and its member companies have pushed back firmly, arguing that their platforms already have “extensive policies to moderate content for minors and provide parental controls,” as detailed in court filings. They warn that state-level age-verification laws could force platforms to collect more personal information from users, raising privacy and security risks, and potentially chilling free expression—especially for vulnerable youth who may not have supportive parents or guardians.
The legal battle in Mississippi is being closely watched by advocates on all sides. Supporters of the law argue that it is a necessary step to address the unique dangers children face online. Opponents counter that such measures amount to government overreach and risk undermining the very freedoms the Constitution is meant to protect. The Supreme Court’s temporary ruling leaves the door open for further appeals, but for now, Mississippi’s law stands as one of the strictest in the nation when it comes to minors’ access to social media.
This case is far from over. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals must still issue a final ruling on the law’s constitutionality, and the Supreme Court could revisit the issue if either the Mississippi Attorney General or NetChoice appeals again. Meanwhile, the tech industry continues to face a barrage of lawsuits from states, school districts, and individual users who allege that social platforms have contributed to a youth mental health crisis—a charge the companies deny.
As the legal and legislative battles play out, the fundamental question remains: how can society balance the urgent need to protect children online with the equally vital imperative to preserve free speech and privacy? The coming months will likely provide more answers, but for now, Mississippi’s law is a test case for the nation.
