The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled in favor of NetChoice, LLC, a trade association representing internet companies, in its challenge against the Tennessee Attorney General's enforcement of the Protecting Children from Social Media Act. The court's decision, filed on August 28, 2026, allows NetChoice to pursue a preliminary injunction against the law, which mandates age verification for social media users. This ruling could significantly impact how social media platforms operate in Tennessee and potentially beyond.
The Protecting Children from Social Media Act requires social media companies to verify the ages of their users and obtain parental consent for minors. NetChoice argues that this law imposes significant compliance costs and infringes on the First Amendment rights of its members and their users. The court's ruling is important as it addresses the balance between protecting minors online and safeguarding free speech rights.
Background
NetChoice, LLC, filed a lawsuit against Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti, challenging the Protecting Children from Social Media Act, which went into effect on January 1, 2025. The law requires social media companies to verify the ages of users and obtain parental consent for those under 18. NetChoice represents several social media platforms, including Facebook, Instagram, and Reddit, which claim that compliance with the law would result in unrecoverable costs and restrict their ability to communicate freely.
The case began in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, where NetChoice sought a preliminary injunction to prevent Skrmetti from enforcing the law. The district court denied this request, stating that NetChoice had not demonstrated irreparable harm. The court's decision prompted NetChoice to appeal to the Sixth Circuit, arguing that the enforcement of the law would lead to significant compliance costs and infringe on free speech rights.
The Ruling
The Sixth Circuit, led by Judge Alice M. Batchelder, disagreed with the lower court's assessment of irreparable harm. The court stated, "The kinds of harm asserted by NetChoice meet our threshold requirement of irreparability." The ruling emphasized that unrecoverable compliance costs and the potential loss of First Amendment freedoms should be considered in the context of granting a preliminary injunction.
The court found that the district court had abused its discretion by not adequately considering the harms NetChoice claimed. The Sixth Circuit vacated the lower court's decision and remanded the case for further consideration, instructing the district court to evaluate the likelihood of success on the merits and the other factors relevant to granting a preliminary injunction. The ruling highlights the importance of balancing the need for protecting minors online with the rights of social media companies and their users.
Impact
The Sixth Circuit's decision could have significant implications for social media companies operating in Tennessee and potentially influence similar laws in other states. By allowing NetChoice to pursue its challenge, the court sets a precedent for how states can regulate social media while considering constitutional rights. The ruling underscores the importance of free speech protections in the digital age, particularly as lawmakers grapple with the impact of social media on minors.
As the case moves forward, it may prompt further discussions about the balance between protecting children online and ensuring that companies can operate without excessive regulatory burdens. The outcome of this case could influence how states approach social media regulation and the extent to which they can impose compliance costs on companies.
What's Next
The case will return to the district court for further proceedings, where NetChoice will have the opportunity to present its arguments for a preliminary injunction. Depending on the outcome, there may be further appeals, and the case could ultimately reach the U.S. Supreme Court if significant constitutional questions arise.