Image Credits - abajournal
Advertisement
A federal judge has issued a partial block on a Texas law known as HB 18, or the Securing Children Online Through Parental Empowerment (SCOPE) Act, which was set to take effect on September 1st. The law, signed into effect last year, imposes new requirements on large web services to protect minors online by identifying their age and filtering content. However, the recent court ruling highlighted that these “monitoring and filtering” mandates could significantly infringe upon free speech.
HB 18 mandates that social networks and other web services implement special rules for users under 18, including restrictions on data collection, a ban on targeted advertising, and prohibitions on financial transactions without parental consent. The law also requires platforms to prevent minors from accessing content deemed harmful, such as material related to suicide, self-harm, substance abuse, and grooming. If any service’s content is judged to be more than one-third harmful or obscene, it must employ a “commercially reasonable age verification method.”
Tech industry groups, including NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA), challenged the law, arguing that it unconstitutionally limits free speech. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) also filed a separate lawsuit. On August 30th, Judge Robert Pitman granted a partial injunction, blocking the monitoring and filtering provisions of HB 18 while the legal proceedings continue.
The court’s decision did not address the entire scope of HB 18. Some provisions, such as those regarding data collection and age verification for adult content sites, remain in effect. Texas has previously mandated age verification on adult sites. The ruling is particularly critical of the law’s undefined terms, such as “promoting,” “glorifying,” and “substance abuse,” which could lead to selective enforcement.
Judge Pitman criticized the law’s potential to limit access to democratic discourse and noted the inconsistency of the law’s application to online content versus other media. For instance, a teenager could read about controversial topics in books but may be barred from viewing related content on video platforms.
This injunction adds HB 18 to a growing list of state-level internet regulations that have faced legal challenges, including California’s Age-Appropriate Design Code Act and similar statutes in Arkansas, Ohio, and Mississippi. The federal Kids Online Safety Act is also under scrutiny for similar concerns. The battle over the SCOPE Act is ongoing, but for now, Texas teens can continue to access a broad range of online content.