• by Wendy Davis  @wendyndavis, April 18, 2025

A federal appellate court has lifted a block on a Mississippi law requiring “digital services” providers to verify all users' ages and prohibit minors from creating social media accounts, without parental permission.

In the ruling, a three-judge panel of the conservative 5th Circuit Court of Appeals said unresolved questions about the law's scope need to be addressed before the statute can be enjoined. The panel sent the case back to the trial judge for further proceedings regarding those factual questions -- including which types of companies are covered by the law.

Mississippi House Bill 1126, which was originally slated to take effect July 2024, requires social platforms to prevent or mitigate minors' exposure to “harmful material” -- defined as including material that promotes or facilitates eating disorders, substance abuse, sexual abuse and online bullying.

The measure applies to websites that allow users to create profiles and socially interact, but exempts employment-related sites and sites that “primarily” offer news, sports, commerce, online video games and content curated by the service provider.

The tech industry group NetChoice challenged the law, arguing it violates the First Amendment.

U.S. District Court Judge Halil Suleyman Ozerden in the Southern District of Mississippi sided with NetChoice and blocked enforcement.

Ozerden also said in the ruling that the provision requiring all users to verify their ages “burdens adults' First Amendment rights.”

He added that the restrictions weren't a good fit for the goals expressed the state. For instance, he wrote, there have been reports of suspected child sexual exploitation on Amazon and Roblox, but both services are exempt from the law.

The judge also said the statute's definition of “digital service provider” -- including the carve-out for services that “primarily” offered news, sports or certain other material -- likely was too vague to be constitutional.

The 5th Circuit said in its opinion that the trial judge failed to consider the “full range” of activities and companies that might be regulated by the law, and whether some applications of the law would not violate the First Amendment.

The district court judge “did not determine whether the Act applies to [digital service providers] like Uber, Google Maps, DraftKings, Microsoft Teams, Reddit, Pinterest, or X,” Circuit Judge Patrick E. Higginbotham wrote.

“Uber, for example, arguably connects users (independent contractor drivers and customers of those independent contractors) and allows them to socially interact with other users on Uber’s app through messages,” he wrote. “It also allows a user to create a private profile for signing into and using Uber and to post content that can be viewed by other users of the digital service.”

Higginbotham added that Microsoft Teams could fall within the law's scope because it “allows individuals to socially interact after creating a semi-public profile for purposes of signing into and using Microsoft Teams and to create content that can be used by other users.”

He also said one “could even puzzle over whether Google Mail is covered by the Act,” because it “facilitates Google Meet video chats.”

NetChoice's Paul Taske, associate director of litigation, stated that the group will consider “all available options.”

“NetChoice will continue to fiercely defend free expression and free enterprise online, and remain confident the law will not stand,” he stated.

Federal district court judges in other states, including Arkansas, Utah and Ohio, have blocked laws that would have restricted teens' ability to use tech platforms.