Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton.
In Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton, the Supreme Court reviewed Texas\'s H.B. 1181, which requires age verification for accessing sexually explicit content online. The Court applied intermediate scrutiny, determining that the law only incidentally burdens adult speech. The decision affirms the state\'s authority to protect minors from obscene content while allowing adults access under regulated conditions.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton.
The Court held that H.B. 1181 triggers, and survives, review under intermediate scrutiny because it only incidentally burdens the protected speech of adults.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Free Speech is relevant to Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton
The case primarily involves the application of the First Amendment's Free Speech Clause, as the petitioners challenge the statute as facially unconstitutional under this provision.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Petitioners—representatives of the pornography industry—sued the Texas attorney general to enjoin enforcement of H. B. 1181 as facially unconstitutional under the First Amendment's Free Speech Clause.
-
Why Substantive Due Process is relevant to Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton
The case involves the regulation of access to speech, which implicates substantive due process rights related to the freedom to access information.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Adults have the right to access speech obscene only to minors, see Butler, 352 U. S., at 383–384, and submitting to age verification burdens the exercise of that right.
-
Why State–Federal Power is relevant to Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton
The case discusses the traditional power of states to regulate access to obscene materials for minors, highlighting the balance of state and federal authority.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The First Amendment leaves undisturbed States' traditional power to prevent minors from accessing speech that is obscene from their perspective.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Paxton that support the summary and concepts above.
H. B. 1181 triggers, and survives, review under intermediate scrutiny because it only incidentally burdens the protected speech of adults.
The First Amendment leaves undisturbed States' traditional power to prevent minors from accessing speech that is obscene from their perspective.
Requiring proof of age is an ordinary and appropriate means of enforcing an age-based limit on obscenity to minors.
