A court has temporarily blocked Ohio’s Parental Notification by Social Media Operators Act. The law was set to take effect on January 15th, but is now on hold after a court order. The state law was intended to limit children’s social media use by requiring parental permission, but a group representing social media companies filed a federal lawsuit earlier this month and a judge issued a temporary restraining order to block the law from going into effect for now.
Tech Industry Group Challenges Social Media Law
According to the Columbus Dispatch, Ohio’s Social Media Parental Notification Act was passed last year as part of the state’s two-year budget and would have made it so parents have to allow children under the age of 16 to use certain social media sites — a government oversight that goes further than some pending federal laws on the topic.
Ohio Capital Journal reports that a tech industry group, NetChoice, asserts three arguments against Ohio’s statute: First, its “blanket parental-consent requirement” would violate minors’ First Amendment rights. Next, the group contends the law imposes restrictions based on content and speaker — both limitations the courts have viewed skeptically. NetChoice also argues the provisions are vague enough that companies won’t know if the law applies to them or their responsibilities if it does.
Court Considerations
The Privacy and Information Security Law Blog writes that the court considered various factors, including:
- whether tech companies would suffer immediate irreparable harm (related to costs of compliance);
- whether minors would suffer immediate irreparable harm (related to not being able to access the platforms);
- the vagueness of the Act (NetChoice argued that its members would not know whether or how to comply with the Act); and
- whether the Act imposed impermissible restrictions on First Amendment-protected speech (versus the Attorney General’s characterization of the law as pertaining to the right to contract, which would require intermediate scrutiny).
Ohio Lawmakers Insist the Law is Needed
Lt. Gov. Jon Husted was the driving force behind the measure, and insists the law is needed. He wrote in a statement,
“In filing this lawsuit, these companies are determined to go around parents to expose children to harmful content and addict them to their platforms,” Husted said. “These companies know that they are harming our children with addictive algorithms with catastrophic health and mental health outcomes.”
Still, experts observe there are many issues with the law, including the vague language and unclear parameters. Because the law passed as a part of the budget process, it did not go through the typical committee review process. This could have resulted in problematic language and approach. In fact, a similar law in Arkansas has been halted by a federal court.
Attorney General Dave Yost announced plans to challenge whether the group even had standing to file the suit and said he will defend the Ohio law.