Pornhub, XNXX in panic? US Supreme Court ruling lets states crack down on online adult content access
The US Supreme Court has upheld a Texas law mandating age verification for pornography websites, a decision that has stirred concerns within the adult entertainment industry. This 6-3 ruling supports Texas House Bill 1181, which requires users to provide age proof before accessing such sites, potentially impacting access and raising First Amendment and privacy concerns.
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Supreme Court Backs Texas Porn Law, Shaking Up the Adult Industry
A Major Shift in First Amendment Interpretation
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Justice Clarence Thomas: Smartphones Changed Everything
Free Speech Advocates Say Adults Pay the Price
Justice Elena Kagan Warns of Privacy Risks in Dissent
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
FAQs
The US Supreme Court on Friday upheld a Texas law that requires users to prove their age before viewing pornography sites, as per a report. The ruling has set off alarm bells across the adult entertainment industry , where sites like Pornhub and XNXX now face an uncertain future in states enforcing similar laws, according to a HuffPost report.The 6–3 ruling supports Texas House Bill 1181 , a 2023 law that mandates online pornography platforms verify users' ages by giving age proof, as per the report. Any site that fails to comply faces steep fines: $10,000 per day and up to $250,000 if minors gain access, as per the HuffPost report.According to the report, now eighteen states, including Texas, have laws in effect that require age verification for pornography sites, while six other states have enacted such laws that are not yet in effect.ALSO READ: Supreme court limits nationwide injunctions: Implications for Donald Trump's birthright citizenship order The decision marks a shift from previous First Amendment rulings. In the 1990s, the Supreme Court struck down two federal laws that attempted to regulate online pornography, the Communications Decency Act and the Child Online Protection Act, ruling they were unconstitutionally restricting free speech, according to HuffPost report.Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the majority, and pointed out that technology has advanced since the court's rulings on those laws enacted in the 1990s, as he said, 'With the rise of the smartphone and instant streaming, many adolescents can now access vast libraries of video content—both benign and obscene—at almost any time and place, with an ease that would have been unimaginable at the time' which the court last ruled on online pornography, quoted HuffPost.Thomas wrote that, 'The statute advances the State's important interest in shielding children from sexually explicit content,' adding, 'And, it is appropriately tailored because it permits users to verify their ages through the established methods of providing government-issued identification and sharing transactional data," as quoted in the report.ALSO READ: Congress cut off? White House limits intel sharing after Iran strikes report leak But lawyers for the Free Speech Coalition, which is a consortium of porn sites, argued that the law placed an undue burden on the speech of adults by requiring them to undergo age verification, while acknowledging that states may restrict access to pornography for minors, as reported by HuffPost.However, Thomas rejected their argument by pointing out that the First Amendment does not protect against age verification. He argued that, '[A]dults have no First Amendment right to avoid age verification, and the statute can readily be understood as an effort to restrict minors' access,' adding, 'Any burden experienced by adults is therefore only incidental to the statute's regulation of activity that is not protected by the First Amendment,' as quoted in the HuffPost report.Meanwhile, Justice Elena Kagan wrote in dissent, saying, 'Under ordinary First Amendment doctrine, this Court should subject H. B. 1181 to strict scrutiny,' adding, 'That is because H. B. 1181 covers speech constitutionally protected for adults; impedes adults' ability to view that speech; and imposes that burden based on the speech's content. Case closed,' as quoted in the report.Kagan pointed out that because the Texas law requires adults to verify their age by providing a driver's license or data 'associated with things like a job or mortgage,' it acts as 'a deterrent' for adults looking to access pornography, according to the HuffPost report.She also said that, 'It is not, contra the majority, like having to flash ID to enter a club,' adding, 'It is turning over information about yourself and your viewing habits—respecting speech many find repulsive—to a website operator, and then to ... who knows? The operator might sell the information; the operator might be hacked or subpoenaed,' as quoted in the report.Yes, if you're in a state with one of these laws. Sites will likely require age proof through ID or other data.You may be blocked from accessing the site in states enforcing these laws.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
12 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Varanasi gang-rape case: Can't be denied that the accused committed the crime, says SIT
VARANASI The special investigation team formed to find out the truth behind the allegations of a 19-year-old girl that she was raped by 23 people during seven days between March 29 and April 4 submitted its report on Thursday. Based on the findings of the investigation, it cannot be denied that the accused committed the crime, the team concluded. Investigation revealed that during the period of disappearance, the victim was seen coming and going independently and with some of the accused. (Pic for representation) 'Investigation found the presence of several accused with the victim at different places on different dates during the period of disappearance. In such serious cases, the Supreme Court and high court have given various important guidelines and decisions, emphasizing that the statement of the victim be given priority. In this context, as per the statement of the victim, and the facts found in the investigation, it cannot be denied that the accused committed the crime,' the SIT stated. Commissioner of police, Mohit Agarwal, confirmed that the SIT submitted the report. During the investigation by SIT, all the evidences were examined by compiling CDR of various persons, statements of witnesses, CCTV footage, Instagram IP logs of the victim, statement of the victim, statements of the accused and their family members. Investigation revealed that during the period of disappearance, the victim was seen coming and going independently and with some of the accused. Meanwhile, she was seen visiting a mall and Chausatti Ghat with her friends. During the period of alleged incident, the victim borrowed mobile phones from about 11 different persons and used them to log in to Instagram and also made calls to many people. When the victim was asked why she did not go home or tell anyone about the incident, she said that she was scared to go home, and due to fear and shame, she did not tell anyone about the incident, the SIT said. The victim's mother lodged a complaint with the police that her daughter went missing from the house on March 29. The police registered a missing complaint, and the girl was recovered from the house of her friend on April 4. The victim's mother alleged that her daughter was sexually assaulted by some people at different locations during her period of disappearance. Thereafter, the police registered a case and arrested 14 accused. Moreover, on April 17, kin of the accused submitted an application to the commissioner of police, demanding that an investigation be conducted in the matter. The commissioner constituted an SIT chaired by deputy commissioner of police, Varuna Zone, Pramod Kumar. The team completed the investigation and submitted a report.
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
Detention untenable: Supreme Court frees Madhya Pradesh student charged under NSA
The Supreme Court on Friday ordered the release of a law student from Madhya Pradesh who had been taken into preventive detention under the National Security Act (NSA), 1980. The court termed the detention 'wholly untenable' and directed his immediate release from Bhopal Central Jail, provided he is not required in any other criminal law student had been detained by an order on July 11, 2024, issued by the District Magistrate of Betul. The detention order was extended four times, with the latest extension valid until July 12, 2025. The authorities cited nine criminal antecedents, including the present case, to justify the detention under Section 3(2) of the the appellant's counsel informed the court that the student had been acquitted in five out of the eight earlier cases, convicted in one where the punishment was limited to a fine and was currently out on bail in the remaining two pending cases. The apex court took note of multiple lapses in the detention process. It said, 'Looking into the facts and circumstances of the case, the court directed the appellant, who is presently lodged in the Central Jail at Bhopal, to be released forthwith from custody, if he is not required in any other criminal case.'The bench observed that the reasons for the detention did not fulfil the criteria under Sub-Section (2) of Section 3 of the NSA. 'Preventive detention of the appellant, therefore, becomes wholly untenable,' the court further noted procedural lapses, including the District Collector's failure to forward the student's representation to the State Government. Additionally, the court pointed out that the authorities had failed to justify why preventive detention was necessary when the appellant was already under custody in connection with a regular criminal student was granted bail in the ongoing criminal case on January 28, 2025. The court remarked that he remained in custody solely due to the preventive detention Supreme Court concluded that it would issue a detailed and reasoned order in due course.- EndsMust Watch IN THIS STORY#Supreme Court
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Bad news for undocumented immigrants! ICE detentions to rise as US President Donald Trump will... Details here
Congress is close to approving a multi-billion-dollar plan that supports President Donald Trump's mass deportation strategy. The proposed funding would increase ICE staffing, enhance enforcement and expand detention efforts. The plan has drawn support and criticism as officials debate its scope and impact on undocumented immigrants, especially those without criminal records. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Immigration Remains Key Focus Supreme Court Ruling How much ICE Funding is Required? Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Agencies Struggle to Retain Officers Deployment of Military in Los Angeles Focus on Arrests of Non-Criminals Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Pressure to Detain More Immigrants Public Opinion and Congressional Debate Detention of Nonviolent Migrants Raises Concern FAQs The US Congress is moving closer to approving a large spending package that would provide billions of dollars for immigration enforcement. This funding would help President Donald Trump carry out his campaign promise of deporting millions of undocumented immigrants living in the United immigration plans have long been a core part of his agenda. The issue was central to his 2024 presidential campaign and continues to be his strongest area of support. According to a recent NBC News poll, 51% of US adults approve of how he handles immigration, while 49% without completing a border wall, illegal crossings have fallen. Trump and his team highlight this decline as a success of their broader enforcement Supreme Court recently made a ruling that allows the Trump administration to continue challenging the 14th Amendment's birthright citizenship guarantees. This ruling, though limited in scope, supports Trump's push for stricter immigration plan requires major increases in immigration personnel. A House bill includes $8 billion over five years to add 10,000 new Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) employees. This would grow ICE's staff by nearly 50%.An additional $858 million is planned for bonuses to help hire and retain these agents. Border Protection could receive $2 billion more for bonuses, with up to $30,000 per new turnover has made immigration enforcement more difficult. Former ICE official Chris Musto said many agents have left their posts. He added that investigators trained for complex cases are now being redirected to routine immigration administration has also reassigned staff from other federal departments to focus on immigration cities like Los Angeles, local resistance to Trump's policies has led to the deployment of National Guard troops. Federal agents have also received support from US Marines to ensure enforcement activities say the result of new funding and staffing will lead to more public immigration raids and a visible federal presence in the administration highlights arrests of people with criminal records, most enforcement actions have targeted those without any criminal Homan, Trump's border policy advisor, says more agents mean more criminals will be removed from the streets. However, recent data shows most ICE arrests involve House staff have reportedly pressured ICE leaders to increase daily arrests. In May, top advisor Stephen Miller demanded 3,000 detentions per urgency has led to confusion about which undocumented immigrants should be targeted. Trump initially said some workers in industries like farming and hospitality would be exempt, but that position later show divided views. Americans support targeting violent offenders but oppose workplace raids, ending asylum protections and expanding detention in Congress have largely opposed Trump's plan. Most Republicans support it, but some, like Senator Rand Paul, have called for reduced draft Senate bill includes less funding than the House version. However, after internal GOP discussions, the Senate plan is expected to match the House's.A recent report showed that 71% of ICE arrests and 67% of detainees had no criminal records. Nearly half of the 55,000 people in ICE detention in late June had no convictions or pending say Trump's enforcement efforts have shifted from targeting serious criminals to focusing on nonviolent plan includes hiring thousands of new ICE agents, expanding detention facilities, and conducting wide-scale immigration enforcement, including detaining undocumented immigrants without criminal show Americans support deporting violent offenders but oppose workplace raids, expanded detention, and removal of asylum protections. Views on the plan vary by political affiliation.
