Summary
The Supreme Court’s hearing of Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton signals potential limits on First Amendment protections for online pornography.
The case involves a Texas law mandating age verification for websites with “sexual material harmful to minors,” challenging the 2004 Ashcroft v. ACLU precedent, which struck down similar laws under strict scrutiny.
Justices, citing the inadequacy of modern filtering tools, seemed inclined to weaken free speech protections, exploring standards like intermediate scrutiny.
The ruling could reshape online speech regulations, leaving adults’ access to sexual content uncertain while tightening restrictions for minors.
deleted by creator
For every “legal” porn site that abides by these laws there’s 10 that don’t give a fuck and aren’t even in the US. Porn id laws won’t change anything.
deleted by creator
The law isn’t about protecting children from porn.
The law is about creating a user database where they can then see who’s looking at LGBTQ+ material and targeting them, while also imposing their religious prudishness on everyone else.
deleted by creator
Stop posting this brain dead take on every post about this topic. Neither of your posts have any value.
What the fuck does a porn site gaining a “more official standing” (read: jumps through some random government hoops) do for American citizen’s privacy?
What about every other porn site that doesn’t operate in the US? This shit is unenforceable and only HURTS the “more official” sites by limiting their users limiting the reach of their models etc.
If you would just open your eyes for one second and get that boot out of your mouth you would see this shit only helps the government control us and what we access, without keeping a single child safe.