Cases in Progress

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: In Effect

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.
• Read FSC’s status report indicating our intention to proceed with the case on July 22, 2025.

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

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.
  • We opposed the state’s motion to dismiss on October 24, 2023.
  • Texas replied to our opposition on November 1, 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.