In an emergency ruling Thursday, the justices denied internet trade group NetChoice's request to reinstate a lower court's order protecting social media giants like Meta, X and YouTube from the new requirements.
The Supreme Court did not explain its order or disclose the vote count, as is typical in emergency cases.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, however, wrote a solo opinion cautioning that NetChoice is likely to ultimately succeed on its First Amendment claims even though he was siding against the group at this stage.
"In short, under this Court's case law as it currently stands, the Mississippi law is likely unconstitutional," Kavanaugh's brief opinion reads.
"Nonetheless, because NetChoice has not sufficiently demonstrated that the balance of harms and equities favors it at this time, I concur in the Court's denial of the application for interim relief," the conservative justice continued.
NetChoice had asked the court to intervene after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit lifted the district judge's decision shielding the platforms from the 2024 law without explanation.
"Neither NetChoice nor this Court can know why the Fifth Circuit believed this law satisfies the First Amendment's stringent demands or deviated from the seven other decisions enjoining similar laws," NetChoice wrote in its request.
It argued it would face "immediate, irreparable" injury should the law be allowed to go into effect.
Mississippi's law establishes requirements for social media companies to confirm their users' ages.
Minors must have express consent from a parent or guardian to use the platform, and covered websites must strive to eliminate their exposure to harmful material or face a $10,000 fine.
U.S. District Judge Halil Suleyman Ozerden found the law unconstitutional as applied to NetChoice members YouTube, X, Snapchat, Reddit, Pinterest, Nextdoor, Dreamwidth and Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram.
The Hill's Ella Lee has more here.
No comments:
Post a Comment