South Dakota Pushes Age Verification Law Despite Legal Hurdles

Published Date : 7/2/2025 

South Dakota is set to implement a stringent age verification law for adult content websites, following the U.S. Supreme Court's endorsement of Texas' similar measure. The law, which bypasses proportional content restrictions, has sparked debates over free speech and digital privacy, with opponents warning of potential overreach and censorship. 

The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision to uphold Texas' age verification requirements for adult content websites has ignited a wave of legislative action across the United States. South Dakota is now at the forefront, set to enforce its own age verification law starting today. This new regulation mandates that websites hosting adult material in the 'regular course of their trade or business' must implement age verification or estimation technology. Unlike Texas' law, which applies to sites where one-third or more of the content is adult-oriented, South Dakota's law does not include a proportional restriction. Lawmakers argue that the 33% threshold used in Texas was arbitrary, a claim that has drawn criticism from both supporters and opponents of the legislation. n n nSouth Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley has publicly endorsed the law, stating that it aligns with the Supreme Court's ruling and aims to 'protect South Dakota families.' However, the decision has also faced significant pushback. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has criticized the law, arguing that it undermines First Amendment protections by imposing sweeping restrictions on adult content access. Justice Elena Kagan, in her dissent during the Texas case, warned that such laws risk 'undervaluing the interest in free expression' by broadly targeting sexually explicit material without sufficient safeguards. n n nThe legal battles surrounding age verification laws are far from over. NetChoice, a powerful industry group representing tech giants like Google, Meta, and Amazon, has continued its aggressive litigation strategy. The organization recently filed a second lawsuit against Arkansas over Act 901, a law requiring social media platforms to implement age assurance measures. NetChoice claims the law is 'unreasonably vague' and could lead to 'frivolous lawsuits' that force platforms to remove protected content, including historical documents or cultural references. The group also raised concerns about the law's potential to restrict speech on topics like drug use, citing examples such as Afroman's 'Because I Got High' as a hypothetical target. n n nIn Georgia, NetChoice has seen some success. A judge recently upheld its challenge to the state's proposed social media age check law, SB 351, calling it a 'major victory for free speech.' The ruling emphasized that 'free expression doesn't end where government anxiety begins,' with NetChoice's litigation director, Chris Marchese, stating that 'parents—not politicians—should guide their children's lives online.' This decision highlights the growing tension between state efforts to regulate online content and the constitutional rights of users. n n nThe debate over age verification laws extends beyond legal arguments. Critics argue that such measures could disproportionately harm vulnerable populations, including LGBTQ+ individuals and survivors of sexual assault, who may rely on adult content for support or information. Meanwhile, proponents claim the laws are necessary to protect minors from exposure to explicit material. The Supreme Court's decision in the Texas case has emboldened states like South Dakota to act, but the long-term implications remain uncertain. As more states adopt similar laws, the balance between digital privacy, free speech, and child protection will continue to be a contentious issue in American politics. n n nThe push for age verification technology has also raised concerns about data privacy and surveillance. Many of the proposed solutions, such as biometric checks or digital ID systems, require users to share sensitive personal information. Advocates for digital rights warn that these measures could lead to widespread data collection, increasing the risk of misuse by governments or corporations. The American Civil Liberties Union has warned that 'sweeping laws purportedly for the benefit of minors do not limit adults' access to First Amendment-protected materials,' a sentiment echoed by other civil liberties groups across the country. n n nAs the legal and political landscape evolves, the future of age verification laws remains uncertain. While South Dakota's law is now in effect, it is likely to face immediate challenges in court. The outcome of these cases could set a precedent for how states regulate online content in the years to come. For now, the debate continues to highlight the complex interplay between technological innovation, constitutional rights, and the role of government in the digital age. 

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQS): 

Q: What is South Dakota's new age verification law?

A: South Dakota's law requires websites hosting adult content in the 'regular course of their trade or business' to implement age verification or estimation technology. Unlike Texas' law, it does not include a proportional content restriction, making it broader in scope.

Q: How did the Supreme Court influence this law?

A: The Supreme Court's ruling upholding Texas' age verification law provided legal precedent for South Dakota to enact its own measure. The decision was seen as a green light for states to regulate online adult content, though it sparked debates over free speech and constitutional rights.

Q: What are the main arguments against the law?

A: Opponents, including the ACLU and Justice Elena Kagan, argue the law risks infringing on First Amendment rights by broadly targeting adult content. Critics also warn of potential overreach, privacy concerns, and the impact on vulnerable populations who rely on such content for support.

Q: What role is NetChoice playing in this issue?

A: NetChoice, representing major tech companies, has filed lawsuits against age verification laws in Arkansas and Georgia. The group claims these laws are 'unreasonably vague' and could lead to censorship, with examples like songs about drug use being hypothetically restricted.

Q: What are the potential consequences of these laws?

A: The laws could lead to increased legal challenges, debates over digital privacy, and a shift in how online platforms manage content. Critics warn of a chilling effect on free speech, while supporters argue they are necessary to protect minors from explicit material. 

More Related Topics :