In a short, unexplained order<\/a>, the Supreme Court refused to do so. There were no noted dissents.<\/p>\n Under Texas\u2019 law, all users must verify their age to access the app store. Users under 18 would also need a parent or guardian to link their account and provide consent for every app download or in-app purchase.<\/p>\n Students Engaged in Advancing Texas claimed the law applied content-based restrictions in violation of the First Amendment. For example, they claimed teens could easily access College Board\u2019s app, but downloading Fortnite, watching YouTube or streaming music on Spotify would require parental approval.<\/p>\n \u201cEven if studying for the SAT is for many Americans more useful and rewarding than playing video games, binge-watching videos, or streaming music, \u2018these cultural and intellectual differences are not constitutional ones,\u2019\u201d the group wrote in its emergency appeal.<\/p>\n The Texas teens noted the age checks would also restrict minors\u2019 access to news, community forums and platforms for creative expression. Students Engaged in Advancing Texas teaches students about policymaking and civic engagement.<\/p>\n The students were joined by the Computer & Communications Industry Association, which filed a separate emergency appeal arguing that Texas had effectively deputized app stores to police minors\u2019 and adults\u2019 access to vast amounts of online speech.<\/p>\n CCIA\u2019s appeal was similarly denied<\/a>.<\/p>\n Texas defended the need for parental oversight and consent.<\/p>\n \u201cA minor child who downloads a software application from an app store agrees to contractual terms of service, including whether the child\u2019s location will be tracked, whether the child\u2019s privacy will be protected, whether information from the child\u2019s phone can be sold by the developer, and whether the child waives the right to sue,\u201d the state wrote in opposition. \u201cBefore allowing minor children to acquire products from app stores and agree to these terms, Texas requires parental consent, including disclosures to parents about the product and contract terms.\u201d<\/p>\n States must satisfy certain requirements when regulating speech protected by the First Amendment. A lower court found Texas\u2019 law failed strict scrutiny \u2014 the highest level of judicial review \u2014 because the state could not show a compelling interest in restricting every category of speech covered by the act or adequately connect its goals to the law\u2019s requirements.<\/p>\n The lower court enjoined the law\u2019s enforcement, but the Fifth Circuit later paused the injunction. The appeals court concluded that the law regulates commercial activity rather than speech itself, giving Texas greater latitude under the First Amendment.<\/p>\n Our weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing
\nFollow @KelseyReichmann<\/a>
\n![](\"\/wp-content\/themes\/cns\/img\/bluesky-white-icon.svg\"\/){kind=icon}
\nFollow @kelseyreichmann.bsky.social<\/a>Subscribe to our free newsletters<\/p>\n
\ntrials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world,
\nwhile the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood,
\nsports, Big Tech and the arts.<\/p>\n