Netchoice, LLC v. Yost (amicus)

In 2023 the Ohio legislature passed Rev. Code § 1349.09(B)(1), the Parental Notification by Social Media Operators Act, with an effective date of January 1, 2024. Like lawmakers in many states, the Ohio General Assembly sought to address the harms of social media and internet use to children and adolescents. The law requires that unemancipated children under the age of sixteen obtain parental consent before agreeing to the terms and conditions of social media platforms. The law places the onus of obtaining and proving that consent on operators of social media web sites and apps.

Netchoice, LLC is a trade association of internet companies, including Google, Meta, Nextdoor, X, and others. Prior to the effective date of R.C. 1349.09(B)(1), Netchoice and other plaintiffs brought suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. After entering a temporary restraining order against enforcement of the new law, the Court issued a preliminary injunction on February 12, 2024. Following the entry of the injunction, the parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment, and oral argument was held on March 13, 2025.

The Court entered summary judgment in favor of Netchoice and its fellow plaintiffs, finding that the challenged law is a content-based restriction on minors’ constitionally protected speech that fails strict scrutiny, and that its vague language violates the due process rights of operators. The state appealed to the Sixth Circuit.

We submitted an amicus brief arguing that Supreme Court precedent provides that aside from specific restricted categories—most notably obscenity—minors have the same First Amendment rights as adults. Their access to protected speech cannot be made contingent on parental approval. The Supreme Court did recently uphold a state restriction requiring that websites publishing primarily sexual material obtain age verification, but that case is distinguishable. Ohio’s law encompasses social media websites generally, and is not limited to pornographic or other adult-only websites. It thus applies an unconstitutional restriction on access to protected speech. Moreover, it also burdens the rights of adults, to the extent that they are required to demonstrate their age in order to satisfy the parental consent requirement.

Ohio’s Attorney General appealed the District Court’s decision on May 13, 2025. Appellants filed their brief on August 19 and Appellees filed theirs on October 3. On October 10 the ACLU of Ohio, ACLU National, and the Electronic Frontier Foundation filed an amicus brief in support of Plaintiffs-Appellees Netchoice, et al. Appellants filed a reply brief on October 23 and an additional citation on November 21. The case has been scheduled for oral argument on February 4, 2026.