June 18 - A federal appeals panel has cleared the way for Ohio to begin enforcing legislation that requires social media companies to secure parental consent before permitting children under 16 to use their platforms. The Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a 2-1 decision overturning a district court order that had temporarily blocked the law.
The law, known as the Social Media Parental Notification Act, was enacted by Ohio's legislature in 2023 and became effective in January 2024. Immediately after it took effect, enforcement was stayed by U.S. District Judge Algenon Marbley at the request of NetChoice, a technology industry trade group representing several major platforms.
Under the statute, operators of websites that can reasonably be anticipated to be accessed by children under the age of 16 must verify user age and obtain parental consent. The measure outlines an 11-factor test to determine whether a website falls within the scope of the law and specifies certain exceptions to its requirements.
NetChoice, whose membership includes platforms such as TikTok, Alphabet's YouTube, and Meta's Facebook and Instagram, challenged the law in court. The trade group argued the statute was unconstitutionally vague and improperly restricted children's access to content protected by the First Amendment.
U.S. Circuit Judge Eric Clay, who wrote the lead opinion for the appellate panel, acknowledged that the law "does place some burden on protected speech and limits how social media companies prefer to distribute their content." Nonetheless, he said the measure was narrowly tailored to address Ohio's stated interest in protecting children. In his opinion, Judge Clay wrote:
"At bottom, the Act imposes a parental consent requirement. That requirement constitutes a marginal burden that precisely targets the multi-faceted problem that Ohio has identified: Children’s unsupervised assent to terms and conditions for use of platforms that take advantage of and harm them."
The panel's decision reverses the lower-court injunction, allowing the state to move forward with enforcement unless the ruling is altered by a further appeal or other court action. Spokespeople for NetChoice and for Ohio Attorney General David Yost did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
This ruling is part of a broader trend in which governments are considering or adopting measures to limit minors' access to social media. The appeals court noted that jurisdictions around the world, including Australia, have pursued regulations aimed at restricting children's online access amid concerns over health and safety.
Ohio's statute is one of several state-level legal confrontations in which NetChoice is engaged, as the group seeks to block laws that authorities contend are necessary to mitigate mental health risks associated with social media use by young people. The appellate court's finding that the state's law does not violate constitutional free speech protections represents a notable development in those ongoing disputes.
How the decision will affect platform policies and compliance practices remains to be seen, and further litigation could alter the legal landscape. For now, the Sixth Circuit's ruling permits Ohio to press ahead with enforcement of its parental consent framework targeted at users under 16.
Key Points
- The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a 2-1 decision allowing Ohio to enforce a law requiring parental consent for users under 16 on social media.
- The Social Media Parental Notification Act, passed in 2023 and effective January 2024, mandates age verification and uses an 11-factor test to define covered websites.
- NetChoice challenged the law as unconstitutionally vague and restrictive; the appellate panel found the statute to be a narrowly tailored response to protecting children.
Risks and Uncertainties
- Further appeals or court actions could reverse or modify the appellate ruling, creating legal uncertainty for social media platforms and their compliance planning - impacting technology and digital services sectors.
- Ambiguities in applying the law's 11-factor test and exceptions may produce litigation over scope and enforcement, potentially affecting platform legal and operations costs in the consumer internet sector.
- Broader regulatory trends in other jurisdictions could prompt additional policy and compliance changes for companies operating across state and international boundaries, with implications for platform moderation and user growth strategies.