Social Media

6th Circuit Backs Ban on Ohio Minors Using Social Media Without Parental Permission

The court said the law—which would require age verification for everyone—constitutes only a “marginal burden” and "does not raise meaningful concerns about muting valuable protected discourse."

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 6.22.2026 11:50 AM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL Add Reason to Google

Media Contact & Reprint Requests

(Volodymyr Tverdokhlib/Dreamstime/Instagram/Tiktok)

A federal appeals court has signed off on Ohio's ban on people under age 16 using social media without parental consent. That means all Ohioans could soon have to show ID to use such platforms as Facebook or X.

A U.S. District Court previously blocked the law, ruling it unconstitutional. But the state appealed, and now a divided 2–1 panel of federal appeals court judges has sided with the state.

You are reading Sex & Tech, from Elizabeth Nolan Brown. Get more of Elizabeth's sex, tech, bodily autonomy, law, and online culture coverage.

Comments

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Email(Required)

SUBSCRIBE

Similar laws have been either temporarily or permanently blocked by federal courts in other states, such as Arkansas, Louisiana, and Utah. That makes the 6th Circuit's decision something of an aberration—and a worrying sign. And I don't just say that because I live in Ohio (though, you know, also: yikes).

Until now, federal courts had seemed aligned in finding laws like Ohio's to be unconstitutional. But the 6th Circuit judges think these rules constitute only "a marginal burden."

Ohio's Social Media Parental Notification Act was signed by Gov. Mike DeWine in 2023. On any website that is reasonably likely to be accessed by minors and where people can interact socially, have a profile, friend other users, and create posts, the law requires people under age 16 to get parental consent before they can create accounts.

The law was challenged by the tech industry trade group NetChoice (which also challenged the Arkansas, Louisiana, and Utah laws and others like them). NetChoice argued that the law "condition[ed] all Ohioans' First Amendment right to share and receive information online on their willingness to hand over their most sensitive, personal data to age-verification services" and that it "implicates a vast territory of speech that lies at........

© Reason.com