On June 27th, the Supreme Court ruled in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton that Texas’s age-verification law did not violate the First Amendment's Free Speech Clause. Justice Thomas wrote the Court’s opinion, holding that States had a right to protect children from obscenity, even if that meant incidentally burdening adults’ own access to that content. Many are celebrating the 6-3 decision as a victory for the protection of children, as it will cement similar laws in the 21 other states that have implemented them. Yet, as in Justice Kagan's dissent, others worry about Paxton’s implications for Freedom of Speech in the digital age. When does an incidental burden become a substantial violation of adults' First Amendment Rights? What kind of precedent does Paxton set for speech cases going forward?
Featuring:

Ashkhen Kazaryan, Senior Legal Fellow, The Future of Free Speech, Vanderbilt University
Clare Morell, Fellow, Ethics & Public Policy Center
Bailey Sanchez, Deputy Director of U.S. Legislation, FUture of Privacy Forum
[Moderator] Jennifer Huddleston, Senior Fellow, Technology Policy, Cato Institute