• by Wendy Davis  @wendyndavis, Yesterday

The tech group NetChoice is urging a federal appellate court to preserve an injunction that prohibits Mississippi from enforcing a law that would require social platforms to verify all users' ages, and would prohibit minors from creating social media accounts without parental permission.

The law "violates the First Amendment by requiring minors to obtain parental consent before accessing speech on covered websites," the group writes in papers filed this week with the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals -- considered the most conservative circuit court in the country.

The group adds that the parental-consent mandate doesn't mesh with the law's stated goal of protecting minors, arguing that if social platforms were actually dangerous for teens, it wouldn't make sense to allow them to access those platforms with parental permission.

In addition to requiring parental consent, the law 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 statute applies 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.

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 NetChoice's members and prohibited the state from enforcing the law against eight companies -- Dreamwidth, Meta Platforms, Nextdoor, Pinterest, Reddit, Snapchat, X and YouTube.

Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch recently petitioned the 5th Circuit 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 wrote, adding: "Requiring age verification and parental consent are common ways to protect minors from harms."

NetChoice opposes that request, arguing that enforcement would violate the First Amendment.

The group also says Mississippi failed to offer evidence that "any regulated websites -- and certainly not the myriad college football forums, recipe-sharing websites, and other regulated online forums" cause harm to minors.

NetChoice adds that its members already moderate "potentially harmful" content, and that parents don't need new laws to wield control over their children's online access.

"The district court found parents already have options to oversee their children online," NetChoice writes. "The Supreme Court has repeatedly endorsed tools like these over governmental intervention."

The 5th Circuit hasn't yet said when it will rule on Mississippi's request.