Protecting Georgia's Children on Social Media Act of 2024 (SB 351) ↗
Preliminarily enjoined 2025-06-26 (NetChoice v. Carr, N.D. Ga., Judge Amy Totenberg), days before its 2025-07-01 effective date, as a poorly tailored First Amendment burden. Georgia's appeal was argued in the Eleventh Circuit on 2026-03-10 and is pending.
Thin entry. The pending Eleventh Circuit appeal (argued 2026-03-10) is briefed against the backdrop of Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton (SCOTUS, 2025-06-27), which reviewed an adult-content age-verification statute under intermediate rather than strict scrutiny; how that framework applies to social-media age-verification laws is a contested question in this and peer appeals. Parental consent is keyed to under-16, narrower than the under-18 social-media acts in this batch. SB 351 also contains data-collection and advertising restrictions on minors and separate provisions (e.g., app/device age assurance) not decomposed here pending primary-text verification. Penalty structure and private right of action not verified (omitted rather than guessed). The Georgia bill-document URL returned HTTP 200 but has no archive snapshot; verify in the US-based CI link check.
Scope
Binds covered social-media platforms, which were required to verify users' ages and obtain a parent's or guardian's consent before granting an account to a user under 16.
The district court's preliminary-injunction opinion (Judge Totenberg) described the covered-platform definition as 'rife with exemptions'; the statutory definition is not pinned here pending primary-text verification.
Key dates
- Effective
- 2025-07-01
Obligations (1)
Verify the age of account applicants and obtain a parent's or guardian's consent before granting an account to a user under 16.
Statute’s own ages: Parental consent required for account holders under 16; users aged 16-17 fall outside this consent requirement (hence no 16_17 bracket).
Litigation history
- 2025-06-26U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia (Judge Amy Totenberg) granted NetChoice a preliminary injunction against SB 351's age-verification and parental-consent provisions, finding the law erects speech barriers that fail rigorous scrutiny and is riddled with purpose-undermining exemptions→ Age-verification/parental-consent provisions unenforceable statewide; the Act did not take effect on 2025-07-01 source ↗
- 2026-03-10Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral argument on Georgia's appeal of the preliminary injunction (Jacksonville, FL)→ No change: the Act remains enjoined while the appeal is pending source ↗
Cross-state comparisons
- similarar-act689 (Arkansas): Both are social-media age-verification/parental-consent laws enjoined on First Amendment grounds, with covered-platform definitions criticized as poorly tailored or vague.
- similarne-lb383 (Nebraska): Both condition minors' social-media accounts on age verification and parental consent and were preliminarily enjoined on First Amendment grounds.