The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has allowed Indiana’s age verification law for pornography websites to move forward, staying an earlier injunction that had blocked its enforcement. The ruling is seen as a victory for proponents of stricter regulations on adult content, as the law aims to prevent minors from accessing explicit material online.

Indiana’s Senate Enrolled Act 17, which was initially set to take effect on July 1, requires pornography websites to verify the ages of users before granting access to their content. However, the law had been on hold due to a preliminary injunction issued by U.S. District Court Judge Richard Young, who deemed the requirements “likely unconstitutional.”

The appeals court’s decision to stay the injunction aligns Indiana’s law with a similar measure in Texas, which has been in effect since April after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to block its enforcement. In their ruling, Judges Frank H. Easterbrook and Amy J. St. Eve argued that “functionally identical statutes should be treated the same while the Supreme Court considers the matter.”

Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita celebrated the decision, stating on social media, “This is a huge win for Hoosier families, ensuring our children can’t easily access explicit material. We will continue upholding our constitutional duty to defend our laws in court.”

Despite the court’s majority ruling, there was a partial dissent from Judge Ilana Diamond Rovner. While she agreed to wait for the Supreme Court’s opinion on the Texas law, she disagreed with granting the stay.

Rovner argued that plaintiffs in Indiana had not yet been subjected to the law’s “burdensome requirements” and that issuing a stay prematurely curtails their First Amendment rights. She cautioned against imposing compliance costs on plaintiffs based solely on the desire for parity with Texas.

The decision has raised questions about the immediate impact on online platforms. Pornography website Pornhub had previously indicated that it would withdraw from Indiana in response to the law. It remains unclear whether the company will follow through with that decision now that the injunction has been lifted.