A divided panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has reversed a district court's permanent injunction against Ohio's Social Media Parental Notification…
A divided panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has reversed a district court's permanent injunction against Ohio's Social Media Parental Notification Act, clearing the way for the state to enforce a first-of-its-kind parental consent regime for minors' use of social media. The 2-1 decision, which vacates the injunction previously obtained by NetChoice, remands the matter for further proceedings and materially reshapes the compliance landscape for platforms operating in Ohio.
The Act requires social media platforms to obtain verifiable parental consent before permitting children under the age of 16 to create or maintain accounts on covered services. Under the statute, the Ohio Attorney General is authorized to seek civil penalties of up to $10,000 per day per affected child, an enforcement structure that can produce substantial cumulative exposure for platforms with meaningful youth user bases in the state.
The ruling is notable both for its immediate practical consequences and for what it signals about the evolving judicial approach to state child-safety measures directed at online services. By reversing the district court, the panel majority found the record insufficient to sustain a facial injunction, and its decision reflects a willingness to allow state legislatures greater latitude to address perceived harms to minors on social media, even as First Amendment challenges continue in parallel litigation across the country.
For covered platforms, the near-term priorities are operational. Companies should evaluate whether their services fall within the Act's scope, assess existing age-assurance and parental consent workflows against the statute's verifiability standard, and prepare escalation protocols for accounts held by Ohio users under 16. Governance teams should also revisit user onboarding flows, recordkeeping practices, and vendor arrangements supporting identity and consent verification, given the per-day, per-child penalty structure.
Beyond Ohio, the decision may embolden other states considering similar frameworks and influence how courts evaluate comparable statutes on remand or in future preliminary posture. Platforms should continue to monitor developments in the ongoing litigation, including any further appellate proceedings, and coordinate compliance responses across jurisdictions with overlapping but not identical requirements.
This alert is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Clients facing questions about the Act's application to their operations should seek tailored guidance based on their specific circumstances.