{"id":352376,"date":"2025-07-04T13:30:54","date_gmt":"2025-07-04T08:00:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=352376"},"modified":"2025-11-29T09:30:38","modified_gmt":"2025-11-29T04:00:38","slug":"texas-age-verification-law-for-pornography-sites-scotus-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/07\/04\/texas-age-verification-law-for-pornography-sites-scotus-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"SCOTUS upholds Texas\u2019 H.B. 1181 law mandating age verification for users visiting pornography websites"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS):<\/span> The Full Bench of the Court comprising of John Roberts, CJ., Clarance Thomas*<\/span>, Samuel Alito, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan**<\/span>, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett and Ketanji Brown Jackson, JJ., were called upon to consider a challenge to the constitutional validity of a law passed by Texas titled H.B. 1181, which mandated age verification of users seeking to visit pornography websites. The Court with a ratio of 6:3<\/span>, upheld the validity of H.B. 1181, stating that the law triggers, and survives, review under intermediate scrutiny because it only incidentally burdens the protected speech of adults.<\/p>\n

Background:<\/h3>\n

Texas prohibits distributing sexually explicit content to children. In 2023, Texas enacted H. B. 1181, requiring certain commercial websites publishing sexually explicit content that is obscene to minors to verify that visitors are 18 or older<\/span>. Petitioners, who represented the pornography industry, sued the Texas\u2019 Attorney General to enjoin enforcement of H. B. 1181 as facially unconstitutional under the First Amendment\u2019s Free Speech Clause. They alleged that adults have a right to access the covered speech, and that the statute impermissibly hinders them.<\/p>\n

The Fifth Circuit Court held that an injunction was not warranted because petitioners were unlikely to succeed on their First Amendment claim. The Circuit Court considered H. B. 1181 as a \u201cregulation of the distribution to minors of materials obscene for minors\u201d and<\/span> therefore determined that the law is not subject to any heightened scrutiny under the First Amendment.<\/p>\n

Court\u2019s Assessment:<\/h3>\n

The majority pointed out that to determine whether a law that regulates speech violates the First Amendment or not, the Court must consider both the nature of the burden imposed by the law and the nature of the speech at issue.<\/p>\n