Moral panic laws are emerging in states across the U.S. during the 2025 legislative season, with North Dakota recently joining the ranks by mandating age verification for pornography access. Critics argue that these new regulations, set to take effect on August 1, pose serious First Amendment violations.
Last month, North Dakota Governor Kelly Armstrong (R) endorsed Senate Bill 2380 and House Bill 1561, which require age verification for websites featuring a substantial amount of “sexual material harmful to a minor.” These sites must employ “reasonable” methods for verification, such as digital IDs or government-issued identification. Failure to comply can lead to potential legal liabilities.
The definition of porn in these regulations is expansive. Not only does it cover explicit sexual acts, but it also includes simulated activities and depictions of pubic hair and female nipples. The legislation aims to regulate content deemed lacking in serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value, relying on “contemporary community standards” to judge what may appeal to “prurient interest.”
As reported by the Age Verification Providers Association, over twenty states have enacted similar age verification laws. Notably, a Kansas woman recently launched a lawsuit against several porn sites after her teenage son accessed inappropriate material on her old laptop. Commenting on North Dakota’s regulations, Rep. Steve Swiontek (R), the chief sponsor of HB 1561, remarked, “There should be some requirement that these adult entertainment sites verify age. We have a moral obligation to protect our kids.”
According to the North Dakota Monitor, Swiontek noted that the state’s laws take inspiration from legislation passed in Utah in 2023. To further explore the implications of pornography, lawmakers also adopted Senate Concurrent Resolution 4017, calling for a study on its negative impacts.
The final versions of SB 2380 and HB 1561 were more moderate than the initial proposals, which sought to mandate “covered manufacturers,” including device makers and app stores, to determine a user’s age upon device activation. Rose Feliciano, executive director of TechNet, expressed concerns that earlier requirements were “vague, cumbersome, and ineffective.”
Despite the adjustments, significant First Amendment concerns remain. NetChoice’s director of state and federal affairs, Amy Bos, stated, “States may protect minors, but they lack a free-floating power to restrict the ideas children can encounter.” She cautioned that age verification measures impose barriers to “constitutionally protected speech” that wouldn’t withstand judicial scrutiny.
Reflecting on similar legislation, Bos indicated that laws in California, Utah, Ohio, Arkansas, and Mississippi have recently failed legal reviews. Furthermore, Texas’ HB 1181, akin to North Dakota’s regulations, is currently under examination by the Supreme Court. Bos warned, “Implementing such a measure in North Dakota would likely face the same challenges, resulting in costly legal battles that do little to benefit local residents.”
Additionally, age verification laws raise serious privacy concerns. Although North Dakota mandates the deletion of collected data, companies often retain unnecessary information, and verification systems can be vulnerable to hacking incidents.
Moreover, age verification methods frequently fail to effectively block access to harmful content. The Electronic Frontier Foundation noted that these regulations have expanded beyond just protecting minors from pornography, with some states proposing similar age checks for skincare products, dating apps, and weight loss pills. EFF emphasized that while protecting children is essential, the unintended fallout includes a significant erosion of privacy, security, and free expression online for everyone.
How does age verification affect freedom of speech? Age verification measures, while intended to protect minors, create significant barriers to access and expression, leading to potential First Amendment violations.
Have similar laws faced legal challenges in other states? Yes, various age verification laws in states like California and Utah have failed legal scrutiny, suggesting that North Dakota’s regulations may also encounter significant obstacles.
What are the privacy implications of age verification laws? Despite regulations that mandate data deletion, age verification systems can still suffer from data retention issues and security breaches, posing risks to personal privacy.
Are there any effective alternatives to age verification? Experts argue that proactive educational measures and outreach programs are more effective than stringent age verification laws in protecting minors from inappropriate content.
In conclusion, while the intent behind North Dakota’s age verification laws may seem well-meaning, they introduce layers of complexity and potential harm, raising critical questions about free speech and privacy. To explore more about such evolving topics, including the implications of digital privacy and media consumption, be sure to check out Moyens I/O.