A federal district court in Montana has dismissed a legal challenge to the state’s online age verification law, dealing a setback to free speech advocates and adult content creators who opposed the statute.

The ruling, issued by U.S. District Judge Donald W. Molloy, stems from a lawsuit filed by the Free Speech Coalition (FSC) and a coalition of writers, sex educators, and adult industry businesses. The plaintiffs sought to block a 2023 Montana law requiring websites that distribute material “harmful to minors” to verify the age of all users accessing the site from Montana-based IP addresses.

The judge ruled that the plaintiffs lacked legal standing to pursue their case after the state legislature amended the law to remove the attorney general’s authority to enforce it. Instead, the law relies on private civil enforcement—a legal tactic that shifts enforcement responsibilities from government agencies to individual citizens.

In his order, Judge Molloy cited the Supreme Court’s prior handling of a similarly structured statute: Texas Senate Bill 8, known as the “Texas Heartbeat Act.” Like Montana’s law, SB 8 prohibits state officials from enforcing its provisions and instead empowers private individuals to sue those who violate it.

“The private enforcement mechanism places the plaintiffs in a procedural bind,” Judge Molloy noted in the order. “Because there is no state actor responsible for enforcement, there is no suitable defendant against whom plaintiffs may seek injunctive relief.”

Montana’s law, passed in 2023, targets platforms that “knowingly and intentionally” distribute material deemed harmful to minors without implementing strict age verification systems. While state officials originally had enforcement authority, the legislature passed a separate bill—after the lawsuit was filed—removing that power from the attorney general’s office. That amendment effectively undermined the plaintiffs’ standing in the case, since they could no longer sue the state to block enforcement.

Mike Stabile, director of public policy for the Free Speech Coalition, expressed frustration with the outcome.

“When we first brought the case in Montana, state law allowed the attorney general to enforce it, giving us legal standing to bring the case against him,” said Stabile. “After we filed suit, the legislature passed a separate bill removing the attorney general from enforcement in an attempt to undermine the litigation. Though we attempted to fight for standing, ultimately the legislature’s evasive gambit proved successful.”

He added that while this particular legal avenue is closed, efforts to challenge such laws will continue: “These are frustrating times, and there are sometimes difficult choices, but it’s critical that we push back when and where we can, to stop even greater restrictions.”

Montana is one of several states that have adopted online age verification laws aimed at restricting youth access to adult content. However, these laws have sparked concern from privacy advocates and free speech groups who argue that the statutes could have a chilling effect on legal content and expose users to data collection risks.

The use of “bounty law” frameworks, which deputize private citizens to enforce laws through lawsuits rather than through government regulation, has been a growing legal tactic in politically charged contexts. Critics warn that this model allows legislatures to sidestep constitutional challenges by avoiding state enforcement entirely.

For now, Montana’s age verification law remains intact and enforceable, with no direct path to federal challenge unless and until a private lawsuit is filed under its provisions.