Cybersecurity Policy Report, Judge Blocks Enforcement of Virginia’s Social Media Restrictions, (Mar 2, 2026)
Organizations Mentioned:NetChoice, LLC
A federal district court in Virginia has blocked the enforcement of a state law that aims to protect minors from addictive social media feeds by requiring age verification and parental consent, granting a request for an injunction that was filed by NetChoice LLC.
NetChoice filed a lawsuit in November 2025 in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia alleging that the law (SB 854) violates the First Amendment. Attorney General Jay Jones (D.) said last month that his office was ready to begin enforcing the state law, which took effect Jan. 1, stating that the new law was necessary to protect the “emotional, mental, and physical safety of our children.”
The law amends the Consumer Data Protection Act to require social media platforms to use “neutral age screen mechanisms” to determine whether a user is younger than 16 and then limit their use of the app or platform to one hour per day. The measure will allow parents to give verifiable consent to increase or decrease their child’s time on social media.
NetChoice in its lawsuit alleges that the law would “place unlawful barriers on how and when all Virginians can access free speech online, increase cybersecurity threats to families and usurp parents.” The law, according to NetChoice, “bars access to valuable, lawful speech simply because it happens online.”
U.S. District Judge Patricia Tolliver Giles ultimately determined that NetChoice is likely to prove that the law unconstitutionally infringes the free speech rights of its members and their users.
“Virginia has the authority to enforce a prohibition that a parent puts in place to prevent their child from accessing information. But Virginia does not have the legal authority to block minors’ access to constitutionally protected speech until their parents give their consent by overriding a government-imposed default limit,” Judge Giles writes in the decision issued Friday.
Judge Giles continues, “The Court recognizes the Commonwealth’s compelling interest in protecting its youth from the harms associated with the addictive aspects of social media. However, it cannot infringe on First Amendment rights, including those of the same youth it aims to protect.”
NetChoice said the ruling “reaffirms that the government cannot ration access to lawful speech—even if it has noble intentions. Fundamentally, parents must stay in the driver’s seat when it comes to decisions about their families.”
“Today’s decision underscores a core truth: unconstitutional laws do not help anyone. Moreover, laws requiring age-verification and other privacy-invasive measures actually make everyone less safe and more prone to data breaches. We are seeing this in real time as countries around the world have started mandating similar privacy-destroying age-verification regimes,” Paul Taske, co-director of the NetChoice litigation center, said in a statement. (NetChoice v. Jason S. Miyares, case 1:25-cv-02067).
News: StateLegislation LitigationEnforcement DataPrivacy