Yeah, saying that "Age verification" is a restriction on the 1st Amendment seems a stretch. The second part of the law struck down (the warning of damage) I CAN see an argument for, but we've long required other companies to place warnings on their products that cause harm and thus can be argued to be compelled speech against their interest (see, most obviously, Tobacco companies and the surgeon general's warnings).
Honestly, I'd need to read the decision, but I'm not sure this stands on appeal. Both restrictions to content based on age appropriateness and mandatory content warnings have long been allowed exceptions to the 1st Amendment.
And note: this is not "banning" porn, no matter how much folks want to spin it like this, this is the state mandating that porn distribution companies utilize active and verifiable age verification methods to prevent children from viewing porn. What this means in practice is requiring people to input something like a Credit Card number or other verifiable ID form to the porn website in order to access it. Right now the MOST porn sites tend to do is put up a splash page with the words "do not enter this site unless you are over 18, are you over 18: YES/NO". Click No will, in fact, close the website, but... there's no verification if you're over 18 when you click "Yes" it just... goes right through. And many porn sites don't even do THAT.
Porn sites don't want to have proactive age verification foisted on them, even though we do it for numerous other things IRL, as even many adults will be hesitant to provide such information for access, thus cutting their traffic and potential revenue down. This isn't about the 1st Amendment for them, it's about their bottom line, and make no mistake that's all this is about. Easy and quick access to porn is very lucrative, and anything that slows that down, and especially anything that makes it harder to get kids hooked early on their product, is a long term earnings threat.
Honestly, I'd need to read the decision, but I'm not sure this stands on appeal. Both restrictions to content based on age appropriateness and mandatory content warnings have long been allowed exceptions to the 1st Amendment.
And note: this is not "banning" porn, no matter how much folks want to spin it like this, this is the state mandating that porn distribution companies utilize active and verifiable age verification methods to prevent children from viewing porn. What this means in practice is requiring people to input something like a Credit Card number or other verifiable ID form to the porn website in order to access it. Right now the MOST porn sites tend to do is put up a splash page with the words "do not enter this site unless you are over 18, are you over 18: YES/NO". Click No will, in fact, close the website, but... there's no verification if you're over 18 when you click "Yes" it just... goes right through. And many porn sites don't even do THAT.
Porn sites don't want to have proactive age verification foisted on them, even though we do it for numerous other things IRL, as even many adults will be hesitant to provide such information for access, thus cutting their traffic and potential revenue down. This isn't about the 1st Amendment for them, it's about their bottom line, and make no mistake that's all this is about. Easy and quick access to porn is very lucrative, and anything that slows that down, and especially anything that makes it harder to get kids hooked early on their product, is a long term earnings threat.