A federal appeals court has ruled that Ohio can enforce a law requiring social media platforms to obtain parental consent before allowing children under 16 to create accounts, handing a significant victory to supporters of tighter online protections for minors.
The decision came from a divided three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which overturned a lower court ruling that had blocked the law from taking effect. The judges concluded that the measure does not violate First Amendment free speech protections.
The law, known as the Social Media Parental Notification Act, requires certain online platforms to verify users’ ages and obtain permission from a parent or guardian before granting access to children under 16.
The challenge was brought by NetChoice, a technology industry trade group whose members include major platforms such as Meta’s Facebook and Instagram, YouTube, and TikTok. The organization argued that the law was overly broad, unconstitutionally vague, and would restrict young people’s access to protected online speech.
However, the appeals court disagreed. Writing for the majority, Judge Eric Clay said the legislation primarily functions as a parental consent requirement and imposes only a limited burden on speech. The court found that Ohio has a compelling interest in protecting minors online and that the law was narrowly tailored to address concerns about children using platforms without parental oversight.
The ruling allows Ohio to move forward with enforcement of the law after it had been stalled by litigation since shortly after taking effect in January 2024.
Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost welcomed the decision, saying it gives parents greater involvement in their children’s online activity. Supporters of the measure argue that parents should have a larger role in decisions involving social media use because of growing concerns about mental health, addictive platform features, cyberbullying, and exposure to harmful content.
NetChoice criticized the ruling and indicated it plans to continue fighting the law. The group argues that age-verification and parental consent requirements raise privacy concerns and could interfere with constitutional rights by making it more difficult for young people to access online information and communities.
The case is part of a broader legal battle playing out across the United States as lawmakers seek new ways to regulate social media platforms and protect minors online. Several states have adopted or proposed similar measures, many of which have faced court challenges from technology companies and digital rights organizations.
The Ohio ruling stands out because it represents one of the first major appellate decisions allowing a state parental-consent law for social media to move forward despite constitutional objections.
As debates over child safety and online freedoms continue, the decision could influence how courts evaluate similar laws in other states and shape future efforts to regulate minors’ access to social media platforms.