Cases in Progress
Keep track of our challenges to unconstitutional age-verification laws
Age Verification Case Updates
Florida: Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Moody
Free Speech Coalition, alongside co-plaintiffs working in the sex education, adult content, sexual wellness, and legal fields, has filed a legal challenge in Florida against the state’s age-verification mandate, which is scheduled to go into effect on January 1, 2025.
Different provisions of the same law, requiring age-verification for social media access, have already been challenged by other litigants. Read more »
Case Status: In Progress
Law Status: In Effect
Timeline
-
December 16, 2024
FSC & co-plaintiffs sued Florida’s Attorney General.
Attorneys
Jeff SandmanD. Gill Sperlein
Gary S. Edinger
Lawrence G. Walters
Firms
Webb Daniel Friedlander LLP
The Law Office of D. Gill Sperlein
Benjamin, Aaronson, Edinger & Patanzo, P.A.
Walters Law Group
Key Points
- HB3 empowers the Florida attorney general’s office to bring civil claims of up to $50,000 per violation against websites with “material harmful to minors” if they do not require visitors to upload a government ID, scan their face, or otherwise verify their age and identity.
- The law violates the First and Fourth Amendments to and Commerce and Supremacy Clauses of the United States Constitution because it impermissibly burdens Plaintiffs’ exercise of their rights thereunder.
Court Filings
- Read the Complaint filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida on December 16, 2024.
Indiana: Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Rokita
Free Speech Coalition and a group of adult platforms have filed a legal challenge in Indiana over the state’s age-verification law, SB17, arguing that it violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. SB17 empowers the state attorney general to file civil suits against platforms with adult content if they do not require visitors to upload a government ID and scan their face, or otherwise verify their age and identity. In addition to challenging the merits of the law, the Free Speech Coalition and its co-plaintiffs have requested an expedited preliminary injunction in the United States District Court Southern District of Indiana. Read more »
Case Status: In Progress
Law Status: In Effect
Timeline
-
August 16, 2024
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals allowed Indiana’s law to go into effect. Read FSC’s statement. -
July 10, 2024
Indiana appealed the District Court’s Preliminary Injunction ruling to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals -
June 28, 2024
The District Court granted a preliminary injunction against the law preventing the Attorney General from enforcing it! -
June 10, 2024
FSC & co-plaintiffs filed the lawsuit.
Attorneys
Derek ShafferMichael T. Zeller
Arian Joseph Koochesfahani
Taylor Elizabeth Comerford
Jeff Sandman
Firms
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP
Webb Daniel Friedlander LLP
Key Points
- The law provides that the Attorney General may bring an action to obtain an injunction against a website and impose a civil penalty of up to $250,000.
- It also creates a private cause of action to permit the parent or guardian of a child harmed by a violation of the age verification requirement or any other person to bring an action against a website.
- The law violates the First Amendment by restricting access to a specific type of constitutionally-protected expression in the most restrictive, yet least effective way.
- The law violates the First Amendment by restricting access to a specific type of constitutionally-protected expression in the most restrictive, yet least effective way.
Court Filings
- Read the Complaint, filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, on June 10, 2024.
- Along with the Complaint, FSC filed a motion for preliminary injunction to keep the law from going into effect as scheduled on July 1, 2024.
Louisiana: Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. LeBlanc
Free Speech Coalition filed a legal challenge in Louisiana over the state’s unconstitutional age-verification law on June 20th, 2023. The Louisiana law gives the state the power to fine sites with adult content up to $5,000 per day, a direct violation of the First Amendment.
Joining Free Speech Coalition in filing the challenge are Elizabeth Hanson, a military veteran and spouse of an active-duty Coast Guard member residing in Slidell; Andrea Barrica, founder of the sex education site O.school; journalist, educator, and content creator Charyn “Ryn” Pfeuffer; and fan platform JustFor.Fans. Read more »
Case Status: On Hold
Law Status: In Effect
Timeline
-
March 28, 2024
The District Court judge granted our request to put the case on hold, pending the outcome of our petition to the Supreme Court in the Texas case. -
November 6, 2023
We appealed the partial dismissal of our case to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals -
October 4, 2023
The judge granted the state’s motion to dismiss part of the case -
October 4, 2023
Hearing on our motion for a preliminary injunction to block the government from enforcing the law -
September 22, 2023
The judge requested briefing from the state about age verification providers -
July 10, 2023
Louisiana filed a motion to dismiss our case -
June 22, 2023
FSC filed a motion for preliminary injunction to block enforcement of Louisiana’s laws -
June 20, 2023
FSC & co-plaintiffs filed a lawsuit challenging the Louisiana law’s constitutionality
Attorneys
Jeff SandmanD. Gill Sperlein
Firms
Webb Daniel Friedlander LLP
The Law Office of D. Gill Sperlein
Court Filings
- Read the complaint, filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana on June 20, 2023.
- Louisiana’s response, filed on October 8, 2023
- Louisiana’s motion to dismiss, filed July 10, 2023
- Judge Morgan’s order, filed October 4, 2023
- FSC’s notice of appeal, filed November 6, 2023
- Order granting FSC’s motion to dismiss the appeal without prejudice, filed April 11, 2024
- FSC filed a motion to withdraw our motion for preliminary injunction and hold the case in abeyance on March 28, 2024, which Judge Morgan granted.
Montana: Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Knudsen
Free Speech Coalition filed a complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief against the Attorney General of Montana, over the state’s age-verification law, SB544, in the US District Court of Montana. FSC and the other plaintiffs, including journalists, sex educators, therapists, book publishers, sexual wellness retailers are asking a district court to block enforcement of the law pending resolution of the case. Read more »
Case Status: In Progress
Law Status: In Effect
Timeline
-
October 22, 2024
The judge denied Montana’s Motion to Dismiss! (read our statement here) -
June 24, 2024
Montana filed a motion to dismiss our case. -
May 14, 2024
FSC & co-plaintiffs sued Montana’s Attorney General.
Attorneys
Jeff SandmanD. Gill Sperlein
Natasha Prinzing Jones
Firms
Webb Daniel Friedlander LLP
The Law Office of D. Gill Sperlein
Boone Karlberg P.C.
Key Points
- The law creates a private cause of action to sue a website that does not “perform reasonable age verification methods to verify the age of individuals attempting to access the material.”.
- The law violates the First Amendment by restricting access to a specific type of constitutionally-protected expression in the most restrictive, yet least effective way.
Court Filings
- Read the Complaint, filed in the United States District Court for the District of Montana on May 14, 2024.
- On June 24, 2024, Montana filed a motion to dismiss our case and accompanying brief.
- We filed our opposition to the case being dismissed on July 15, 2024.
- Montana filed their reply to our opposition on July 29, 2024.
- Judge Molloy’s order denying the Motion to Dismiss.
Tennessee: Free Speech Coalition, Inc v. Skrmetti
Free Speech Coalition, along with a diverse range of co-plaintiffs, has filed a legal challenge in Tennessee over the state’s age-verification law, arguing that it violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. SB1792 empowers the state attorney general to bring felony criminal charges against websites with “material harmful to minors” if they do not require visitors to upload a government ID, scan their face, or otherwise verify their age and identity. Joining FSC in the challenge are a host of others harmed by the law, including individuals and companies working in sex education, journalism and sexual wellness, as well as adult content creation and distribution. Read more »
Case Status: In Progress
Law Status: Not In Effect
Timeline
-
December 30, 2024
The District Court granted a preliminary injunction, blocking the Attorney General from enforcing the law! -
December 23, 2024
The judge held a hearing on the motion for preliminary injunction. Afterward, Tennessee filed a motion to dismiss our case. -
November 26, 2024
FSC & co-plaintiffs sued Tennessee’s Attorney General.
Attorneys
Jeff SandmanD. Gill Sperlein
Edward M. Bearman
Firms
Webb Daniel Friedlander LLP
The Law Office of D. Gill Sperlein
The Law Office of Edward M. Bearman
Key Points
- The law creates liability “for damages resulting from a minor’s accessing the content harmful to minors, including court costs and reasonable attorney fees”, in addition to criminal liability to the State, as violations constitute a Class C felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison and $10,000 in fines.
- The law violates the First and Fourth Amendments to, and Supremacy Clause of, the United States Constitution, because it impermissibly burdens Plaintiffs’ exercise of their rights thereunder.
Court Filings
- Read the complaint, motion for preliminary injunction, and supporting memorandum, filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee on November 26, 2024.
- Tennessee filed their response on December 15, 2024.
- The judge granted the injunction on December 30, 2024. The state requested the judge stay her decision while they appealed it. She did not.
- Tennessee filed a motion to dismiss the case on December 23, 2024.
Texas: Free Speech Coalition, Inc v. Paxton
Free Speech Coalition, the advocacy organization for the adult industry, has filed a legal challenge in Texas over the state’s unconstitutional age-verification law. As with laws FSC has challenged laws in Louisiana and Utah, Texas forces consumers to provide identification information to access adult content. In addition, the Texas law requires that adult sites carry pseudoscientific “warning labels.” Read More »
Case Status: In Progress
Law Status: In Effect
Timeline
-
September 20-23, 2024
Twelve parties filed “friend of the court” briefs in support of our arguments. -
September 16, 2024
We filed our merits brief with the Supreme Court. -
July 31, 2024
The Supreme Court set deadlines for briefing in our case. Our merits brief will be due on September 16, 2024. The Texas response is due November 15, 2024. -
July 2, 2024
The Supreme Court granted our petition for certiorari! Read our statement here. -
Jun 20, 2024
Our case was on the agenda for consideration by the Justices. While not was not one of the seven cases the Court agreed to hear at that meeting, it was not one of the 81 that they denied. -
April 26, 2024
The Supreme Court denied our application for a stay of the 5th Circuit’s decision. Read FSC’s statement on the decision. -
March 7, 2024
The 5th Circuit barred the state from mandating pseudoscientific “health warnings” on adult websites and lifted the injunction against the state’s age verification mandate. Read FSC’s statement on the decision. -
November 14, 2023
The 5th Circuit converted the administrative stay of the preliminary injunction to a merits stay (for more, read our statement about what this means). -
Oct 4, 2023
5th Circuit hearing re: preliminary injunction. -
September 5, 2024
Texas appealed the preliminary injunction decision to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals -
Aug 31, 2023
The judge ordered a preliminary injunction blocking the Texas law from taking effect! (read our announcement) -
August 23, 2023
District Court hearing regarding our motion for preliminary injunction. -
Aug 4, 2023
FSC & co-plaintiffs filed a lawsuit challenging Texas HB 1181.
Full appeal history and documents
Supreme Court case information
Attorneys
David D. ColeVera Eidelman
Scott L. Cole
Derek Shaffer
Michael T. Zeller
Arian Joseph Koochesfahani
Jeff Sandman
Firms
ACLU Foundation
Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP
Webb Daniel Friedlander LLP
Key Points
- The law provides that the Attorney General may bring an action to impose a civil penalty of up to $10,000 per day of noncompliance.
- Websites are required to display pseudoscientific “health” warnings to consumers on their “landing page”, footer, and all advertisements “in 14-point font or larger”.
- The law violates the First Amendment rights of creators and consumers, has a chilling effect on constitutionally-protected speech and compels speech in the form of health warnings.
Court Filings
- Read the Complaint, filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division, on August 4, 2023.
- Along with the Complaint, FSC filed a motion for preliminary injunction to keep the law from going into effect as scheduled on September 1, 2023.
- Texas opposed our request for a preliminary injunction on August 21, 2023.
- We filed our response to the Texas opposition brief on August 21, 2023.
- The District Court granted a preliminary injunction on August 31, 2023, blocking the law from taking effect.
- Texas filed notice that it would appeal the District Court’s decision on August 31, 2023.
- Texas filed a motion to dismiss our case on October 11, 2023.
- Following the grant of the preliminary injunction, Texas appealed to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals
- The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals granted an administrative stay of the preliminary injunction, allowing the law to take effect on September 19, 2023.
- The ACLU, CDT, EFF, FIRE, Media Coalition, and TechFreedom filed an amicus brief in support of our case.
- On November 14, 2023, the 5th Circuit converted the administrative stay of the preliminary injunction to a merits stay.
- The 5th Circuit handed down a mixed opinion, barring the state from mandating pseudoscientific “health warnings” on adult websites while lifting the injunction against the state’s age verification mandate on March 7, 2024.
- We filed a petition for a writ of certiorari requesting that the 5th Circuit decision be stayed and overturned by the Supreme Court on April 12, 2024.
- On April 26, the Supreme Court denied our application for a stay of the 5th Circuit’s decision. Read FSC’s statement on the decision.
- On July 2, 2024, the Supreme Court granted our petition for certiorari.
- We filed our merits brief and joint appendix on September 16, 2024
- Eleven groups of amici curiae filed briefs in support of our case with the Supreme Court:
- Center for Democracy & Technology, New America’s Open Technology Institute, Prof. Eran Tromer (Boston University), and Prof. Sarah Scheffler (Carnegie Mellon University)
- Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), Reason Foundation, First Amendment Lawyers Association
- Institute for Justice
- Cato Institute
- Electronic Freedom Foundation, Woodhull Freedom Foundation, and TechFreedom
- Law Professors: Zachary Cantanzaro (St. Thomas University), Eric Goldman (Santa Clara University), Robert Heverly (Albany Law School), Jane Kirtley (University of Minnesota), Mark Lemely (Stanford Law School), David Levine (Elon University), and Yvette Joy Liebesman (Saint Louis University)
- International Centre for Missing and Exploited Children (ICMEC)
- National Coalition Against Censorship and O.School
- American Booksellers for Free Expression, Association of American Publishers, Authors Guild, Comic Book Legal Defense Fund, and Freedom to Read Foundation
- Atsign
- First Amendment Scholars: Jennifer Safstrom (Vanderbilt Law School), Clay Calvert (American Enterprise Institute), Erwin Chemerinsky (UC Berkley), Alan Chen (University of Denver), Brett G. Johnson (University of Iowa), Lyrissa Lidsky (University of Florida), Clare R. Norins (University of Georgia), Amanda Reid (University of North Carolina), and Nadine Strossen (NYU).
- In addition, the Solicitor General filed a brief on behalf of the United States supporting our position that the Fifth Circuit’s decision should be overturned.
Utah: Free Speech Coalition v. Anderson
Case History
October 1, 2024: 10th Circuit Reaffirms Motion to Dismiss (read our statement)
March 20, 2024: In-person oral argument at the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals
December 20, 2023: FSC filed our response to Utah’s brief
November 29, 2023: Utah filed its reply to our appeal
Sep 27, 2023: FSC filed an appeal at the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals
Aug 11, 2023: FSC notified the court of our intent to appeal the ruling dismissing the case to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals
Aug 1, 2023: The judge granted Utah’s motion to dismiss the case (read our statement)
Jun 14, 2023: Utah filed a motion to dismiss our lawsuit
May 31, 2023: FSC filed a motion for preliminary injunction to block the enforcement of the law
May 3, 2023: FSC & co-plaintiffs filed lawsuit challenging the law’s constitutionality