A U.S. federal appeals court has ruled that Ohio may enforce a law requiring social media companies to obtain parental consent before allowing children under 16 to use their platforms, handing a significant victory to state officials seeking greater oversight of minors’ online activity.
The decision by a divided three-judge panel of the Cincinnati-based Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned a lower court ruling that had blocked enforcement of Ohio’s Social Media Parental Notification Act. The law was challenged by NetChoice, a technology industry trade group whose members include major platforms such as Meta Platforms, Alphabet’s YouTube and TikTok.
READ: US expands AI chip restrictions on Chinese firms overseas (June 1, 2026)
Ohio’s law requires websites and platforms that are reasonably expected to be accessed by children under 16 to verify users’ ages and secure parental approval before minors can create accounts. The legislation was passed in 2023 and was scheduled to take effect in January 2024 before being halted by a federal judge.
Writing for the majority, Judge Eric Clay said the law places only a limited burden on speech and is narrowly tailored to address the state’s interest in protecting children online. The court concluded that the parental-consent requirement directly addresses concerns about minors agreeing to platform terms and conditions without adequate supervision.
Ohio Attorney General Andy Wilson welcomed the ruling, saying it gives parents greater tools to oversee their children’s online activities. NetChoice, however, argued that the decision threatens constitutional rights and online privacy protections for Ohio residents. The group said it remains confident the law will eventually be struck down and plans to continue its legal challenge.
READ: UK faces calls for social media ban for children under 16 (June 15, 2026)
The ruling comes amid growing efforts worldwide to regulate children’s access to social media because of concerns about mental health, online safety and addictive platform features. Similar legislative initiatives have emerged across the United States and internationally, including in Australia and several European countries.
The Ohio case is part of a broader legal battle between state governments and technology companies over how far regulators can go in protecting minors without violating free-speech rights guaranteed under the First Amendment.