The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to block Mississippi’s new age-verification law for social media, dealing a blow to major tech firms including X, Reddit, Discord, and AOL (Yes, apparently AOL is still a thing), which had petitioned against the measure through trade association NetChoice. The Court cited FSC v. Paxton, a June ruling upholding Texas’s age-verification law for adult sites, as precedent.

The decision signals a turning point: rules once aimed almost exclusively at adult platforms are now extending to mainstream services. What began as legislation “to protect children from porn” has grown into a broader framework governing access to social media, music, and video platforms, raising alarms about online privacy and speech.

For years, tech giants quietly carved out exemptions for themselves. Most state-level age verification laws use a “33.3% standard” requiring age checks only for sites where one-third or more of the content is “harmful to minors.” That formula excluded mainstream platforms but left adult sites to shoulder the full regulatory burden.

When laws like Florida’s HB3 included verification requirements for both social and adult platforms, large tech companies argued they were comfortable with restrictions on porn, distancing themselves from the adult industry. But that strategy has backfired, with lawmakers now expanding the reach of verification requirements.

“Anyone who believed that government censorship of internet speech would stop with adult content was profoundly naïve,” said Mike Stabile, spokesperson for the Free Speech Coalition (FSC). “Had the mainstream tech industry taken the threat against us seriously rather than arguing that our speech was less worthy of protection, we might not be in this situation.”

Twenty-four states now have some form of online age verification law. Tennessee has gone further than most, requiring users to upload ID every 60 minutes to continue accessing restricted sites. The state also broadened its law to include content with “excessive violence,” opening the door to sweeping enforcement beyond pornography.

The Supreme Court’s Texas ruling was pivotal. In his opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote: “Adults have no First Amendment right to avoid age verification.” That language is expected to influence ongoing cases in Tennessee, Florida, and elsewhere.

Legal experts warn that the “harmful to minors” standard is elastic, often encompassing LGBTQ resources, sex education, reproductive health content, and more. “Once the door has been opened for regulating one type of content … that door is cracked open for any other kinds of content the government wants to touch,” said Jess Miers, a law professor at the University of Akron.

The push for ID uploads has created serious risks. In early August, a hack of the Tea Dating Advice app exposed nearly 1 million women’s personal data, including at least 13,000 government IDs. Images from the breach were compiled into an online map on 4chan.

Privacy advocates argue this illustrates the danger of handing over government identification to websites.

“Your driver’s license contains a ton of somewhat immutable information about you,” said Lisa Femia, attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “That’s your address, your face, your name, and a lot of that isn’t going to change.”

Supporters of the laws, many aligned with conservative groups such as the Heritage Foundation, argue they are essential to closing a “loophole” in online safety. Some have gone further, calling for an outright ban on pornography. “We need courageous lawmakers and Christians to expose the evils of pornography and put an end to this odious industry,” wrote Heritage analyst Emma Waters last year.

Others, however, see the legislation as a wedge issue that threatens the foundation of internet anonymity and free speech. A study from NYU’s Center for Social Media and Politics found that Louisiana’s law didn’t stop teens from accessing porn but rerouted them to unregulated sites or VPNs.

With the Supreme Court’s refusal to intervene, Mississippi’s law is set to take effect immediately, while cases in Tennessee and other states move forward. Analysts expect more states to follow suit, emboldened by recent judicial backing.