上诉法院允许俄亥俄州限制儿童使用社交媒体
Appeals Court Allows Ohio To Restrict Children's Use Of Social Media

原始链接: https://www.zerohedge.com/technology/appeals-court-allows-ohio-restrict-childrens-use-social-media

美国第六巡回上诉法院裁定,俄亥俄州可以执行《社交媒体家长通知法》,该法律要求社交媒体公司须获得未满16岁用户的家长同意。这项以2比1通过的裁决,推翻了地方法院此前以违反宪法第一修正案为由阻止该法律生效的裁定。 代表多数意见的埃里克·克莱法官认为,该法律仅施加了“轻微负担”,且目标明确,旨在保护未成年人免受未经监管的社交媒体使用所带来的既定风险。俄亥俄州总检察长安迪·威尔逊对这一裁决表示赞赏,称其赋予了家长监督孩子数字安全的权利。 代表Meta和TikTok等大型科技公司的贸易组织“网抉”(NetChoice)强烈批评了该裁决,声称这违反了宪法权利并威胁到用户隐私。该组织曾在其他州成功挑战过类似法律,并表示正在考虑采取进一步的法律行动。目前,由于对心理健康和网络安全的担忧日益加剧,世界各国正越来越多地考虑限制未成年人使用社交媒体。

相关文章

原文

Authored by Aldgra Fredly via The Epoch Times,

A federal appeals court on Thursday allowed Ohio to enforce a law requiring social media companies to obtain parental consent before permitting children under 16 to access their platforms.

Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube, Facebook, Twitch, and Reddit applications are displayed on a mobile phone on Dec. 9, 2025. Hollie Adams/Reuters

The law, known as the Social Media Parental Notification Act, was passed by the state's legislature in 2023 and took effect in January 2024. NetChoice - a trade group representing TikTok, Meta, and other major tech companies - later filed a lawsuit, alleging that the law was unconstitutional.

In April, U.S. District Judge Algenon Marbley ruled in NetChoice's favor and permanently blocked Ohio from enforcing the law. The state subsequently appealed the ruling.

In a 2-1 decision on June 18, a panel of the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the lower court ruling, finding that Ohio's law does not violate the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Writing for the majority, Circuit Judge Eric Clay said the state law imposes only "a marginal burden" by requiring parental consent for children to use social media platforms.

"That requirement constitutes a marginal burden that precisely targets the multi-faceted problem that Ohio has identified: Children's unsupervised assent to terms and conditions for use of platforms that take advantage of and harm them," Clay said.

"Parental consent will not always be narrowly tailored to the compelling interest in protecting minors' well-being. It works here because the nature of the harm itself is that children's unsupervised use of social media puts them at risk of the adverse effects of prolonged and unregulated exposure."

Ohio Attorney General Andy Wilson praised the appeals court's decision, calling it "a win for Ohio families."

Wilson said in a statement that the ruling would allow parents to supervise their children's use of social media.

"The court agreed that parents - not social media companies - should get a say in what kids see online. We have an obligation to keep our children safe, and today, the most dangerous place for our kids is the internet," he stated. "This decision gives parents the tools to be involved and provide oversight."

NetChoice said the appeals court's decision will threaten the online privacy and constitutional rights of Ohioan residents. The group suggested that it intends to continue the legal challenge.

"By requiring parents to override the government's determination, Ohio has violated bedrock First Amendment principles," Paul Taske, director of the NetChoice Litigation Center, said in a statement. "We are currently reviewing our options on how best to move forward."

NetChoice last year won court rulings blocking a similar social media parental consent law in Arkansas and a children's digital privacy law in California.

Australia became the first country last December to impose a ban on social media for children under 16 amid concerns about the online safety risks to the nation's youth.

Several countries have since followed suit or are weighing similar social media restrictions over concerns about the platforms' impact on children's mental health. Among those countries are the UK, Austria, Denmark, France, Indonesia, and Malaysia.

Reuters contributed to this report.

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com