On August 14, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a decision that could shape the future of how children interact with social media in America. The justices refused, at least for now, to block enforcement of Mississippi’s controversial new law requiring social media platforms to verify users’ ages and obtain parental consent for minors. The law, which was passed unanimously by the state legislature in 2024, reflects mounting national anxiety about the impact of social media on young people’s mental health and safety.
The case at the heart of this legal battle was brought by NetChoice, a prominent tech industry group whose members read like a who’s who of Silicon Valley: Meta’s Facebook and Instagram, Alphabet’s YouTube, and Snapchat, among others. NetChoice argues that Mississippi’s law threatens privacy rights and unconstitutionally restricts free expression for users of all ages. According to Reuters, the group contends that the law violates the U.S. Constitution’s protections against government abridgement of free speech.
The Supreme Court’s decision was delivered in a brief, unsigned order with no noted dissents. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, however, issued a statement that signaled where the legal winds might ultimately blow. He wrote that there’s a good chance NetChoice will eventually succeed in showing that the law is unconstitutional, but the group had not met the high bar needed to block the law while the case plays out in the lower courts. As Kavanaugh put it, the challenge “likely” has merit, but the emergency appeal failed to demonstrate the sort of immediate harm or legal clarity required for the Court to intervene at this early stage.
Mississippi’s law is among the most ambitious in the nation. It requires social media platforms to make “commercially reasonable” efforts to verify the age of every user and to obtain “express consent” from a parent or guardian before a minor can open an account. The stakes for noncompliance are high: the state can pursue civil penalties of up to $10,000 per violation, and criminal penalties under Mississippi’s deceptive trade practices law. According to the Associated Press, the law aims to shield children from a host of online dangers—sexual abuse, trafficking, physical violence, sextortion, and more—threats that Attorney General Lynn Fitch argues are not protected by the First Amendment.
In a statement welcoming the Supreme Court’s decision, Fitch’s office emphasized that age verification and parental consent requirements are “common ways for states to protect minors.” The Attorney General’s stance reflects a growing bipartisan consensus in state legislatures across the country: something must be done to curb the “explosive use of social media among young people,” as supporters of the law have put it, and to address what researchers say is an associated rise in depression and anxiety.
NetChoice, for its part, is not backing down. Paul Taske, co-director of the NetChoice Litigation Center, called the Supreme Court’s order “an unfortunate procedural delay.” Yet Taske took heart from Justice Kavanaugh’s statement, saying it “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.” The group has filed similar lawsuits in Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Ohio, and Utah, and courts in at least seven states have already preliminarily or permanently blocked comparable measures, according to NetChoice.
The legal saga in Mississippi has already seen its share of twists and turns. U.S. District Judge Halil Suleyman Ozerden in Gulfport initially blocked the state from enforcing the law against some NetChoice members, including Meta, Snapchat, and YouTube. Ozerden issued a second order in June 2025 pausing the rules against those companies. But the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in New Orleans, issued a terse, one-sentence ruling on July 17 that paused the judge’s injunction, allowing the law to take effect while the lawsuit proceeds. The Supreme Court’s refusal to intervene keeps the law in force for now, even as the constitutional battle continues.
Behind the legal arguments lies a broader debate about the role of government, the rights of parents, and the responsibilities of powerful tech companies. Supporters of the Mississippi law—many of them parents, educators, and mental health advocates—argue that tech companies have failed to protect children from harmful content, predatory behavior, and addictive platform designs. They point to mounting evidence linking social media use with increased rates of depression, anxiety, and even suicide among teens. As the Associated Press reported, some parents and teenagers themselves have joined the chorus of concern, demanding stricter safeguards and more parental oversight.
On the other side, NetChoice and its member companies insist that they are already doing plenty to keep minors safe. In its filings, NetChoice told the courts that its platforms have adopted extensive policies to moderate content for minors and provide robust parental controls. The group argues that the Mississippi law goes too far, threatening not just privacy but the free speech rights of millions of users—adults and children alike. As Paul Taske put it, “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.”
The Mississippi case is being closely watched by lawmakers, advocacy groups, and tech executives across the country. According to Reuters, this marks the first time the Supreme Court has been asked to consider a social media age-verification law. The outcome could set a precedent for how far states can go in regulating online platforms, and how the courts will balance the competing interests of child safety, parental rights, corporate responsibility, and constitutional freedoms.
For now, Mississippi’s law remains in effect, and social media companies operating in the state must scramble to comply or risk steep penalties. The state, meanwhile, is preparing to defend its law on the merits in the lower courts, arguing that its approach is both necessary and constitutionally sound. As the Attorney General’s office put it, the Supreme Court’s decision “permits thoughtful consideration of these important issues” as the case moves forward.
Across the country, the debate is far from settled. Some states have seen their own age-verification laws blocked by courts, while others are pressing ahead with new legislation. Tech companies are facing a barrage of lawsuits from states, school districts, and individual users who allege that social platforms have fueled mental health problems. The companies deny any wrongdoing and maintain that they are committed to protecting minors.
As the legal and political battles continue, one thing is clear: the question of how to regulate children’s access to social media is not going away anytime soon. With the Supreme Court’s latest decision, Mississippi’s law stands—at least for now—as a test case for the nation, a flashpoint in the ongoing struggle to balance safety, privacy, and free speech in the digital age.