US Supreme Court poised to rule in challenge to Texas age-check for online porn
By Andrew Chung
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule on Friday in a challenge on free speech grounds to a Texas law that requires pornographic websites to verify the age of users in a case testing the legality of state efforts to keep minors from viewing such material online.
A trade group representing adult entertainment performers and companies appealed a lower court's decision allowing the Republican-led state's age-verification mandate, finding that it likely did not violate the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment safeguard against government abridgment of speech.
The Texas measure is one of 24 similar ones enacted around the United States, primarily in Republican-governed states, with some set to take effect in the months ahead, according to the Free Speech Coalition, which challenged the law.
The law requires websites whose content is more than a third "sexual material harmful to minors" to have all users submit personally identifying information verifying they are at least age 18 to gain access.
The case tested the limits of state powers to protect minors from explicit materials deemed by policymakers to be harmful to them with measures that burden the access of adults to constitutionally protected expression.
Supreme Court precedents have protected access by adults to non-obscene sexual content on First Amendment grounds, including a 2004 ruling that blocked a federal law similar to the Texas measure. If the 2004 precedent prevents Texas from enforcing its law, then it should be overruled, the state argued, noting how the digital landscape has changed dramatically in the two decades since.
The coalition, a trade association of adult content performers, producers and distributors, as well as companies that run pornographic websites including Pornhub.com, xnxx.com, xvideos.com and Brazzers.com, argued that online age verification unlawfully stifles the free speech rights of adults and exposes them to increasing risks of identity theft, extortion and data breaches.
Some sites like Pornhub blocked access entirely in states with age-verification laws.
Steps such as content-filtering software or on-device age verification would better protect minors while respecting the rights of adults, according to the challengers.
During Jan. 15 arguments in the case, the justices voiced worries about the pervasiveness of pornography online and the ease with which minors are able to access it. Conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett, the mother of school-age children, noted that minors can get online porn through cellphones, tablets, gaming systems and computers, and noted that there has been an "explosion of addiction to online porn."
But some of the justices also expressed concern over the burdens imposed on adults to view constitutionally protected material, debating whether the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals should have applied a stricter form of judicial review to the Texas law than the one it actually used that gave deference to legislators.
U.S. District Judge David Alan Ezra issued a preliminary injunction in 2023, blocking the law.
The 5th Circuit ruled in 2024 that the plaintiffs were unlikely to succeed in their First Amendment challenge to the age-verification requirement, lifting Ezra's injunction on that provision. The 5th Circuit upheld Ezra's injunction against another provision requiring websites to display "health warnings" about viewing pornography.
The Supreme Court last year declined to halt enforcement of the law while the case proceeded.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
E&E News
14 minutes ago
- E&E News
The oil and gas industry has a water problem. EPA wants to help.
Oil and gas companies are running out of options for disposing of polluted water they generate every day, a problem for the Trump administration's 'energy dominance' agenda. EPA is offering the industry a hand by promoting reuse of that wastewater. The effort worries environmentalists, but it could draw crucial political allies in oil-producing states. The agency plans to update rules for what can be done with water that emerges from the ground during oil and gas extraction. The goal is to allow the chemical-laden, super-salty brine to be substantially cleaned and reused for power generation, water-guzzling data centers and irrigating rangeland. Advertisement Reusing the water could address a major industry challenge and help ease crippling drought in parts of Texas and New Mexico, two of the nation's most prolific oil-producing states. A growing body of research suggests that the water — which is three or more times saltier than seawater — can now be safely treated for certain applications, from industrial cooling to growing alfalfa and other non-food crops, proponents say. 'The short answer is New Mexico is supportive,' said James Kenney, secretary of the state's Environment Department. 'We want to be EPA's partner and thought leader on this.' But while treatment technologies for produced water have progressed, critics say they remain expensive and energy intensive. Environmentalists and some local officials also worry that EPA will not require testing for all potential pollutants lurking in the water, creating contamination risks. 'EPA [has been] very upfront by saying that there's a lack of data on the technology and its ability to effectively and reliably treat this fluid,' said Dan Mueller, a Texas-based water resources engineer who has worked with the Environmental Defense Fund. 'That is a struggle, and I continue to make that advocacy point.' Drilling in the Permian Basin, the oil field that straddles Texas and New Mexico, can generate three or more times as much wastewater as oil. During hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, water deep underground mixes with naturally occurring salt, radioactive materials, heavy metals and, potentially, chemicals used to fracture shale. For years, companies have reinjected the dirty brine underground in designated locations. But that can provoke earthquakes and risks polluting water supplies. With state regulators now tightening rules around deep well injection, companies are increasingly trying to recycle, treat and reuse the water. The push comes as reservoirs in the Rio Grande Basin are around a quarter percent full, and New Mexico's governor declared a drought emergency last month. If water supplies continue to dwindle, it could stifle clean energy and new industries such as data centers, experts say. 'I'm honestly really excited about the opportunity that this represents, because it's a significant volume of water, and the economics are now competitive with the cost of disposal by deep well injection,' said Shane Walker, director of the Texas Produced Water Consortium at Texas Tech University. Still, Mueller and other skeptics want to see the oil industry do more to reduce its own water footprint before companies can treat and sell their wastewater for other uses. Others worry that the oil-friendly Trump administration and states won't enact proper guardrails to ensure treated water is safe to reuse. 'While I do think there are some beneficial reuses of these waters, our concern is they will be loosely regulated and appropriate oversight will not occur,' said Dana Ames, an environmental crimes investigator in Johnson County, Texas. Treatment options The oil sector's wastewater problem has spawned an industry of its own specializing in disposing of and trying to treat the brine. An oil-and-water mixture is pooled at a wastewater disposal site serving the oil and gas industry outside Eunice, New Mexico, on March 8, 2016. | New Mexico State Land Office via AP One such company is Aquafortus, which has a produced water treatment project in Colorado City, Texas, said Earl Jones, chair of the board for the company. EPA officials toured the site last month, Jones said. The biggest challenge with produced water is its extremely high salt content, but other materials are largely 'not a big deal' to remove, he said. 'This is a pilot facility that's intended to demonstrate the technology, which it does, both in terms of the effectiveness of desalination — the clean water that comes out the backend — and the economics,' Jones said. Although it's not currently done on a large scale, treating 'produced water' at drilling sites is becoming cost competitive with other disposal options, said Mike Hightower, the former program director of the New Mexico Produced Water Consortium. That's because state regulators have cracked down on where the brine can be injected underground to quell the risk of earthquakes. 'They have to truck it out of the basins and into other areas,' Hightower said. 'Once you start trucking water, it gets to be very expensive.' As EPA moves to 'standardize' treatment and reuse of produced water, the practice could soon become common, he predicted. Texas and New Mexico have each invested millions of dollars into research on the topic. 'It's a big opportunity, and I think people need to acknowledge that EPA is trying to do the right thing,' Hightower said. But proponents of reusing produced water in New Mexico encountered a major setback last month. The state's Water Quality Control Commission adopted a rule prohibiting discharge of produced water to groundwater and surface waters, effectively shutting the door on widespread reuse for the next five years. The decision was a win for environmental groups, who say it's still unclear if regulators can ensure that treated produced water is safe to apply on land or in surface waters. One problem is the lack of comprehensive data on specific chemicals that oil and gas companies inject underground, said Colin Cox, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. While Colorado enacted a law in 2022 requiring companies to disclose fracking chemicals, that isn't mandated nationwide, Cox said. 'We don't know how to test for all the contaminants we are aware of, we don't know how to treat for all the contaminants potentially in there, and there haven't been demonstrations of how this would work,' he said. 'I'm proud of the Water Quality Control Commission in New Mexico doing the right thing and protecting us.' PFAS concerns In Texas, meanwhile, the Commission on Environmental Quality is evaluating four permit proposals to discharge treated produced water into creeks and reservoirs. A scarecrow floats on the surface of a tailings pond to keep birds from landing in the toxic wastewater from oil production near Fort McMurray, Canada, on Sep. 2, 2023. | Victor R. Caivano/AP The Legislature also enacted a law last month that could thrust reuse of produced water into the mainstream — while prompting fresh concerns about the safety of the material. The law shields oil and gas companies from lawsuits should contamination or other issues occur after produced water is sold, treated and reused. Supporters of the policy say it provides companies with the legal certainty they need to invest in treatment technologies. 'It's about offering regulatory certainty to the industry that's the backbone of this state,' Drew Darby, a Republican who chairs the Energy Resources Committee in the Texas House of Representatives, said during a hearing earlier this year. But the legal shield set off alarm bells for Ames, the Johnson County official. Located 20 miles south of Fort Worth, the county declared a state of emergency in February due to severe contamination from per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS. The toxic, human-made forever chemicals were allegedly spread via sewage sludge fertilizer, spurring a cattle die-off and possibly sickening farmers, Ames said. Although it's not clear how much PFAS is used in fracking, the chemicals have been found in some produced water. With state and federal regulators taking a hands-off approach to PFAS in sewage sludge, Ames worries that testing for the chemicals — which include thousands of unique compounds — will not be mandated for produced water discharges. 'We are extremely concerned the EPA will not require PFAS testing be conducted before the waters are released for their reuse purpose,' Ames said. 'If they refuse to regulate PFAS in biosolids, what do you think the likelihood is they're going to do that in fracking water or produced water?' EPA declined requests for an interview on how it plans to advance treatment of produced water and regulate it. The agency's expert engineer on produced water, Jesse Pritts, also retired June 13, according to an automatic reply from his EPA email address. He's one of many career staffers heading for the exit amid agency restructuring and the looming threat of firings under President Donald Trump. By updating federal wastewater standards for produced water, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin plans to advance his top two priorities, protecting the environment and 'promoting energy dominance,' an agency spokesperson said. 'Current effluent regulations limit where and how wastewater from this industry, also known as produced water, can be discharged,' the spokesperson said. 'These regulations do not reflect advancement in treatment technology that have occurred.' In an April presentation to nonprofits, EPA officials indicated they were gathering feedback on what types of pollutants should be monitored and regulated in an upcoming rule. 'Are there concerns you have about pollutants in produced water generally, or in arid West, specifically? Are there specific pollutants that you would like to see limits for in an effluent guidelines revision?' one slide stated, according to a copy of the presentation obtained by POLITICO's E&E News. The presentation said the timing of a potential ruling was still uncertain. Walker, of the Texas Produced Water Consortium, said the agency seems to be trying to move quickly. As for safety concerns, he stressed that there are technologies to treat for and remove all potential contaminants in produced water, including heavy metals, ammonia and chemical compounds. Nonetheless, he noted that treatment itself — especially to remove all the salt — is energy-intensive, a potential barrier to widespread deployment. '[The energy] is not trivial, and in West Texas, the grid is not really set up to handle that level of energy demand,' Walker said. 'So we've actually received some funding to support research on that energy-water nexus.' For Mueller, the water resources engineer and consultant, there's another option for better managing produced water that must be pursued: recycling. The term refers to reusing produced water to frack for more oil and gas, which does not require expensive or energy-intensive treatment and reduces demands on freshwater. The practice is increasingly being employed by the oil industry. Still, non-industry data is limited on exactly how widely it is being done, Mueller said. 'The No. 1 step is to maximize recycled water first, and then see what's left for these other uses that could be used for this produced water,' he said. This story originally appeared in Greenwire.
The Hill
15 minutes ago
- The Hill
Birthright citizenship plaintiffs make new push to block Trump's order nationwide
A group of plaintiffs challenging President Trump's birthright citizenship restrictions quickly made a new push to block it nationwide, following the Supreme Court's decision Friday. In a 6-3 ruling along ideological lines, the high court's conservative majority curtailed federal judges' ability to issue nationwide injunctions. But it left the door open for plaintiffs to try to seek broad relief by filing class action lawsuits. Within hours, a group of plaintiffs suing in Maryland jumped on the suggestion, asking a district judge to issue a new ruling that applies to anyone designated as ineligible for birthright citizenship under Trump's order. 'Without a class-wide injunction, Defendants will deny thousands of babies in the putative class their constitutional and statutory right to United States citizenship, as well as all of the rights and privileges that citizenship entails,' the motion reads. 'Consistent with the Supreme Court's most recent instructions, the Court can protect all members of the putative class from irreparable harm that the unlawful Executive Order threatens to inflict,' it continues. The motion was filed by CASA Inc., the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project and several expectant mothers who filed one of the original lawsuits challenging Trump's executive order. The request will go to U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman, an appointee of former President Biden.
The Hill
15 minutes ago
- The Hill
Supreme Court's blockbuster day
Thank you for signing up! Subscribe to more newsletters here Happy Friday! This is a great weekend for television — the third and final season of 'Squid Game' is out on Netflix, and 'The Bear' is also back! Oh, and did you know, that infamous debate between Biden and Trump was one year ago today? In today's packed Supreme Court edition: To close out its term, the Supreme Court fired off major decision after major decision this morning. 1 — Birthright citizenship: The Supreme Court delivered President Trump a major win this morning, allowing his executive order to restrict birthright citizenship to go into effect in some areas of the country — at least for now. Importantly, the high court's ruling limits the ability of federal judges across the country to issue nationwide injunctions blocking Trump's policies. The White House is thrilled (more below on that). The ruling: 6-3, along ideological lines. Liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson issued fiery dissent over the conservative court's decision. But here's the thing: The court didn't weigh in on the constitutionality of Trump's executive order. Instead, the justices weighed in on whether three federal judges have the power to block Trump's order nationwide. The court ruled those judges went too far. But the administration has to wait 30 days before attempting to deny citizenship to anyone. There are still legal challenges to the constitutionality of restricting birthright citizenship, so this may not be the end of the issue. Trump took a victory lap: He called it a 'GIANT WIN' in a quick social media post. He then held a press conference to celebrate what he hailed as a 'monumental' ruling, praising Justice Amy Coney Barrett and giving a shout-out to each of the conservative justices by name. 'That was meant for the babies of slaves. It wasn't meant for people trying to scam the system and come into the country on a vacation,' Trump said, referring to the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution. Attorney General Pam Bondi chimed in at the podium. 'The judges have tried to cease the executive branch's power and they cannot do that. No longer,' Bondi said, bashing 'rogue' judges who she claims have 'turned district courts into the imperial judiciary.' 'Active liberal [judges] have used these injunctions to block virtually all of President Trump's policies,' Bondi told reporters. 💻 Watch Trump's presser Backstory: Trump issued an executive order restricting birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. with parents who do not have permanent legal status. 2 — Parent opt-out options for LGBTQ+ books: The court sided with religious parents this morning, allowing parents of Maryland elementary school children to opt out of classroom discussions involving LGBTQ+-inclusive books. The ruling: 6-3, along ideological lines. The three liberal justices dissented. 3 — Age verification for porn sites: The Supreme Court ruled that Texas's age-verification law for porn websites *is* constitutional. The ruling: 6-3, along ideological lines. The three liberal justices dissented. The case: Texas has a law requiring porn sites to verify that users are at least 18 years old. The Supreme Court was weighing whether this law is a violation of the First Amendment. Twenty other states have similar laws, so this ruling could limit porn access. 4 — ObamaCare's preventative care requirements: The Supreme Court sided with the Trump administration in allowing Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to appoint and fire members of an ObamaCare task force. The ruling: 6-3. Justice Brett Kavanaugh authored the opinion. The case: Is a task force created by ObamaCare that determines free preventative care services constitutional? 5 — Federal internet subsidies: The court upheld a multibillion-dollar federal subsidy program to give internet to rural and poor Americans. The ruling: 6-3. Justice Elena Kagan wrote the opinion. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch dissented. The case: The court weighed whether programs that bring high-speed internet to rural and poor communities are a violation of the separation of powers. Read more ❌ 6 — Racial redistricting: The Supreme Court did *not* rule on this case and will rehear arguments next term. The case: Can Louisiana continue to use its congressional map that includes two majority-Black districts, or is that unconstitutional racial gerrymandering? Read more on the case 📸The cloudy, humid Supreme Court today 🗨️ Follow today's live blog Republicans are barreling toward their own deadline to pass President Trump's legislative agenda, even after the Senate parliamentarian threw a grenade into their plan. How's that going?: Trump has cranked up the pressure on the GOP, despite the hurdles. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) says he has 'contingency plans, plan B, plan C.' Trump was asked what he thinks about the parliamentarian's ruling: 'The parliamentarian's been a little difficult. I would say that I disagree with the parliamentarian on some things and on other ways [she's] been fine.' Is the July 4 deadline still possible?: Technically, yes, but it's tricky. Here's a helpful explainer. Why gutting some Medicaid cuts from the bill was such a big blow: Republicans needed those steep Medicaid cuts to pay for the rest of the bill. Without that component, they're back to the drawing board without those hundreds of billions of dollars in savings to offset the cost of their legislation. The Hill's Nathaniel Weixel wrote a helpful explainer. This is some Olympic-level ping-ponging: Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said this morning that the House may need to amend the Senate bill. That would mean the bill would need to head *back* to the Senate again, explains The Hill's Mychael Schnell. Like a game of hot potato! Tidbit: Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent will attend the Senate GOP lunch today, per Punchbowl News. ➤ THE PARLIAMENTARIAN PULLED OUT HER RED PEN AGAIN: Senate parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough rejected another part of the 'big, beautiful bill.' She ruled against a Republican attempt to exempt some religious colleges from a tax carve-out. She also ruled against Republicans' gun silencer deregulation. Read more ➤ MEANWHILE ON THE HOUSE SIDE: House lawmakers received a briefing this morning on the U.S. strikes against Iran. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Joint Chiefs Chair Gen. Dan Caine and CIA Director John Ratcliffe led it, per Politico. The House and Senate are in today. President Trump is in Washington. (All times EST) 3 p.m.: Trump meets with the foreign ministers of the Democratic Republic of Congo and the Republic of Rwanda. 6 p.m.: The Senate votes on Sen. Tim Kaine's (D-Va.) war powers resolution on Iran. 📆Today's agenda Sunday: Sens. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) and Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) and New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani will appear on NBC's 'Meet the Press.' 🎂 Celebrate: Today is National Ice Cream Cake Day! It feels like the perfect weekend to make this one. 🍕 'Did Busy Pizza Shops Really Predict US Airstrikes on Iran?': An account on social platform X has been tracking the activity of pizza shops near the Pentagon, based on Google's 'popular times' data, suggesting it may predict foreign policy events. Washingtonian spoke with an intelligence expert to weigh in on whether this may be an accurate measure. ✖️ The Pentagon Pizza Report X account 🐾 'Here's the mail, it never fails, it makes me wanna wag my tail': Steve Burns, the original host of 'Blue's Clues,' is launching a podcast for adults. 'When it comes I wanna wail, MAAAAIL!' 🍦 I will wake up in a cold sweat because of this headline: The Atlantic's Yasmin Tayag writes, 'Brace Yourself for Watery Mayo and Spiky Ice Cream.' The gist: 'Emulsifiers have become targets in RFK Jr.'s push to remove many additives from the American diet. But without them, food wouldn't be the same.' To leave you on a good note before the weekend, here's a bird creatively scavenging for nest materials.
