Revealing where his loyalties lie, an activist judge has prioritized Big Tech’s interests over parents trying to protect their children from harmful online content.
Specifically, Federal Judge Algenon Marbley has struck down Ohio’s Social Media Parental Notification Act.
The ruling blocks a law that would have required parental consent for minors under 16 to use social media platforms, dealing a significant blow to parental rights in the digital age.
The federal court decision marks another troubling instance of judicial overreach that prevents states from protecting children from the documented harms of social media addiction.
Judge Marbley issued a permanent injunction against the Ohio law, which was part of an $86.1 billion state budget bill signed by Republican Governor Mike DeWine in July 2023.
The law would have required social media platforms to verify that users were at least 16 years old and obtain parental consent for younger users.
It was designed to address growing concerns about the impact of social media on children’s mental health and development.
The DeWine administration specifically cited evidence that social media platforms are “intentionally addictive” and harmful to young people.
The challenge to the Ohio law was led by NetChoice, a tech industry group representing major companies like Meta, TikTok, and X.
The organization has successfully challenged similar protective laws in other conservative states.
NetChoice has claimed these laws violate the First and 14th Amendments by requiring platforms to collect personal data for access.
“Protecting children’s well-being is a laudable, perhaps even achievable, goal,” wrote Judge Marbley, before striking down the law anyway.
“This court finds, however, that the Act as drafted fails to pass constitutional muster and is constitutionally infirm,” he continued.
The judge also added that even the government’s “most noble entreaties to protect its citizenry” must abide by the U.S. Constitution.”
Governor DeWine expressed his disappointment with the ruling and urged Congress to take action to protect children online.
“This decision puts powerful tech companies ahead of parents and fails to recognize the real damage being done to our youth,” DeWine stated in his response to the ruling.
The court’s ruling represents a concerning trend where judges overrule protections enacted by elected state representatives.
Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost’s office is reviewing the decision to determine its next steps, which may include an appeal to higher courts.
This judicial roadblock is part of a larger pattern of legal obstruction against conservative states trying to protect children from harmful online content and influences.
Similar laws in Arkansas, Utah, and California have faced challenges from the same tech industry group that opposes parental oversight while claiming to value user safety.
