Online safety laws in US face powerful pushback from Big Tech’s legal avatars

If the age assurance regulations enacted around the globe in 2025 make for a sound metaphorical wave, the same cannot be said of matters in the U.S., which more closely resembles an ongoing cyclone of litigation. A large chunk of it comes courtesy of NetChoice, the legal lobby for Silicon Valley’s biggest companies, which has spent 2025 playing Whac-A-Mole with state-level online safety legislation.

This week, the organization announced that the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana has granted its motion for summary judgment in NetChoice v. Murrill, imposing a permanent injunction to strike down Louisiana’s Act 456, which imposed age assurance measures on social media platforms.

As usual, NetChoice’s weapon of choice is the First Amendment. The Louisiana ruling by Judge John W. deGravelles says that the state cannot use a “free-floating power to restrict the ideas to which children may be exposed,” meaning it violates the right to protected speech.

“Today, the First Amendment prevailed in Louisiana,” says a statement from Paul Taske, co-director of NetChoice’s Litigation Center. “The government lacks authority to restrict access to lawful speech it does not like. As the district court recognized, the First Amendment forbids the government from posting ID-checks outside the library door – and the same is true when it comes to social media.”

The assertion is already dubious, and becomes more so with Taske’s politically loaded suggestion that Louisiana’s law “would have created a massive privacy risk for Louisianans like those playing out in real time in countries without a First Amendment, like the UK.”

NetChoice takes the occasion to note its other recent victories in Ohio and Arkansas, saying the combined decisions “send a clear message to policymakers nationwide that legislative good intentions do not override the Constitution.”

The Arkansas decision, which sees the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas granting NetChoice’s request for a preliminary injunction against Act 901, “affirms that algorithms are protected by the First Amendment” and that “banning these tools because they might be ‘addictive’ is not narrowly tailored and would burden the speech of every Arkansan on the platform.”

In a release, Taske says “Arkansas cannot employ creative drafting to evade the First Amendment,” and that NetChoice is confident Act 901 will be struck down permanently as the case moves forward. Should it pass, it would enshrine a private right of action enabling individuals to pursue legal recourse against platforms deploying addictive algorithms.

Apple driving CCIA pushback against app store laws

The other major force challenging age check laws in U.S. courts is the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA), which shares several members with NetChoice, including Meta and Google. One significant difference is Apple, which is a member of the CCIA but not NetChoice.

This week, representatives for the CCIA appeared before a federal district judge to argue against SB 2420, the Texas App Store Accountability Act, which puts age checks at the app store level. Apple opposes the law, to the extent that CEO Tim Cook has personally petitioned Texas Governor Greg Abbot to abandon it.

Now, the CCIA is asserting that the law is unconstitutional and should be blocked from taking effect on January 1, 2026 as scheduled, until the court can hold a full hearing on its legality. To support its cause, it has filed amicus briefs on behalf of academia, retailers, industry coalitions Chamber of Progress the App Association, and a group of media organizations.

In a release, Stephanie Joyce, director of CCIA’s Litigation Center: says the law is “grossly overbroad, involves forced-speech mandates, and is not remotely tailored to its stated purpose. It is a deeply flawed statute that the Court should block under the First Amendment.”

It is not just Big Tech gunning against age assurance laws for social media. In October, a group of Texas students sued to block the app store law, claiming it violates First Amendment rights. And developers have complained that the law’s timeline doesn’t give them enough leeway to prepare.

The present tension over U.S. age assurance legislation spans the country. Last week, the House Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade voted to advance a package of eighteen online safety and children’s privacy bills, which includes HR 3149, pertaining to age checks for app stores.

Article Topics

age verification  |  app store age verification  |  children  |  Computer & Communications Industry Association  |  legislation  |  Louisiana  |  Netchoice  |  social media  |  Texas age verification