• by Wendy Davis  @wendyndavis, July 2, 2025

Mississippi on Wednesday asked a federal appellate court to allow enforcement of a law that would require social platforms to verify all users' ages, and would prohibit minors from creating social media accounts, without parental permission.

Last month, U.S. District Court Judge Halil Ozerden in the Southern District of Mississippi ruled that the law likely violates the First Amendment rights of members of the tech group NetChoice. Ozerden issued an injunction prohibiting the state from enforcing the law against eight NetChoice members -- Dreamwidth, Meta Platforms, Nextdoor, Pinterest, Reddit, Snapchat, X and YouTube.

Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch is now asking the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals to lift that injunction, arguing that the law reflects a valid attempt to protect teens from "predatory harm."

"States may (for example) bar people from sexually abusing, selling drugs to, sextorting, or harassing minors," Fitch writes, adding: "Requiring age verification and parental consent are common ways to protect minors from harms."

She also adds that Mississippi will face "irreparable harm" unless the injunction is lifted, arguing that it "thwarts the State’s efforts" to protect minors.

In addition to requiring parental consent for social media, Mississippi House Bill 1126 would require 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.

As written, the law would apply to websites that allow users to create profiles and socially interact, with exemptions for employment-related sites and sites that “primarily” offer news, sports, commerce, online video games and content curated by the service provider.

NetChoice sued to block the law on First Amendment grounds, arguing that the Supreme Court previously ruled that minors have the right to access all lawful content.

Siding with NetChoice, U.S. District Court Judge Halil Ozerden in the Southern District of Mississippi initially blocked e nforcement last year, ruling that the statute's parental-consent provision likely violates the First Amendment, and that the law is so vague that it likely violates social media platforms' right to due process of law.

Mississippi appealed that decision to the conservative 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, which lifted the block in April. That court said Ozerden should have addressed questions about the law's scope before blocking it.

The appellate judges specifically said Ozerden hadn't considered the “full range” of activities and companies that could be covered by the law, and whether some applications of the law would not violate the First Amendment. For instance, the appellate court wrote, Ozerden didn't examine whether the law would apply to a host of companies -- incuding Uber, Google Maps or DraftKings.

In May, NetChoice again asked Ozerden to block the law on First Amendment grounds. The group noted in its renewed request that the law excludes Uber, Google Maps and DraftKings because Google Maps and Uber mainly provide content themselves, and that DraftKings offers sports. 

Ozerden again sided with NetChoice, writing: "As applied to NetChoice’s covered members, the Act likely burdens substantially more speech than is necessary for the state to safeguard the physical and psychological wellbeing of minors online."

The 5th Circuit hasn't yet said when it will hear Mississippi's appeal.