Case Explained: 26a0177p.06

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-18 The sixth-circuit reversed the district court’s judgment enforcing Ohio’s Parental Notification by Social Media Operators Act and remanded with instructions to enter judgment in favor of the state Attorney General. The court held that NetChoice, LLC lacked prudential third-party standing to assert the First Amendment rights of minor users because a significant conflict of interest existed between the trade association’s financial incentives and the welfare of the minors it sought to represent. Regarding the merits of the facial challenge, the court applied strict scrutiny because the Act was content-based, but concluded that the law survived constitutional review as it was narrowly tailored to serve the compelling state interest in protecting children from the documented harms of social media use, including mental health issues and exploitation. Additionally, the court rejected NetChoice’s vagueness challenge, finding that while some provisions contained subjective factors, the statute provided sufficient notice to operators of ordinary intelligence and was not impermissibly vague in all its applications. Consequently, the Act is valid, and the injunction against its enforcement is vacated. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.