225

Supreme Court (SCOTUS) upholds a Texas law that requires porn websites to verify that their visitors are 18 or older, rejecting a First Amendment challenge to the law (www.eff.org)

submitted 4 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

63 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Today’s decision in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton is a direct blow to the free speech rights of adults. The Court ruled that “no person—adult or child—has a First Amendment right to access speech that is obscene to minors without first submitting proof of age.” This ruling allows states to enact onerous age-verification rules that will block adults from accessing lawful speech, curtail their ability to be anonymous, and jeopardize their data security and privacy. These are real and immense burdens on adults, and the Court was wrong to ignore them in upholding Texas’ law.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top new old

[-] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago

I wonder what all the "pro-porn", "pro-free speech", gamergate republican pundits on the internet have to say about this...

[-] [email protected] 35 points 2 days ago

sex is bad but dropping bombs on muslims is okay

[-] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago

Strangely the right to life crowd really loves killing people. However I do think it is unfair to label them as anti-muslim, because the also love killing children, women, the poor... Basically anyone who is not rich and male.

[-] [email protected] 14 points 2 days ago

And now those VPN subscriptions go up, up, up.

[-] [email protected] 69 points 3 days ago

Here's that nanny state Republicans were always talking about

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

Projection, it is secretly what they wanted the whole time.

[-] [email protected] 17 points 3 days ago

Pretty sure "Nanny state" is a popular category of porn

[-] [email protected] 96 points 4 days ago

But there's no such legislation or required identification for my kids to see graphic violence and gore. We're a pretty bass ackwards society.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago

ironic you self censored "ass backwards" on a comment calling out censorship.

[-] [email protected] 32 points 3 days ago

they wrote ass backwards ass backwards. It's a joke, not self censorship.

[-] [email protected] 10 points 3 days ago

We're so ass backwards my go-to thought was the censored version.

load more comments (50 replies)

[-] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

The headline got me on the first third.

[-] [email protected] 78 points 4 days ago

Free speech only applies to saying the N word

-Supreme Court probably some time in the future

[-] [email protected] 10 points 4 days ago

Ah, the ol in haec verba Tarantino rule

[-] [email protected] 19 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Am I the only one who beleives that it would have been a more effective arguement to try and use the 4th amendment instead of the 1st? Violating free speech is just a weak claim, but "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches..." seems quite relevent here. But I am also not a lawyer.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments

this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2025

225 points (98.3% liked)

Technology

72212 readers

3561 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related news or articles.
Be excellent to each other!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]