5th Circuit Declares Age Verification Perfectly Fine Under the First Amendment
techdirt.com
techdirt.com
Non-obscene porn (okay for adults, not okay for children) is protected by the First Amendment, while obscenity (determined by the Miller test [1]) is not protected (not okay for adults, not okay for children) by the First Amendment. The Fifth Amendment's decision that some sexual material can obscene only when viewed/read by children and non-obscene when viewed by adults relates to the mandated age verification part of the Texas law, and has little if any relation to the mandated "health warnings" (which are for adults, since children aren't allowed to be on the site).
Which is interesting because the term porn is not exactly well-defined. Modern usage of the term includes things like architecture porn, car porn, etc. which do not constant sexual imagery at all.
The Texas age verification law concerns porn in general, not just obscenity. Obstacles to adults' access to protected speech must pass strict scrutiny in most cases. Perhaps mandated age verification on porn sites could be interpreted as a "place" restriction to support intermediate scrutiny [5] rather than strict scrutiny, but I'm not sure that public decency laws governing physical spaces such as strip clubs are applicable to digital websites. If you enter a strip club then the staff will instantly have a visual estimate of whether you're an adult. If you go to a porn website with an age verification system then you might have to give the website or the verifying party much more information than your age.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_test
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_obscenity_law
[3] https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/rational_basis_test
[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strict_scrutiny#Applicability
[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermediate_scrutiny#Free_spe...