pending state-law state-california Enacted September 10, 2026
California law barring social media platforms from offering personalized algorithmic feeds, autoplay, infinite scroll and similar engagement features to users under 16
Legal Impact: From 1 January 2027, requires covered platforms to verify users' ages and either serve under-16 users a version without the listed features or not serve them, with civil penalties of up to $50,000 per affected minor
Key Issues:Prohibits covered platforms from providing features the law defines as addictive — including personalized algorithmic feeds, autoplay, infinite scroll and push notifications — to users under 16Requires a platform that cannot offer a version without those features to stop serving under-16 users+3more
amended state-law state-california Enacted October 13, 2025
California law (AB 1043) requiring operating system providers to collect a user's age at device setup and send apps a real-time signal placing the user in one of four age brackets
Legal Impact: From 1 January 2027, moves age determination for apps from individual services to the device operating system, and gives developers that receive an age signal legal knowledge of a user's age range for purposes of other state laws
Key Issues:Operating system providers must offer an interface at account setup for entering the user's birth date, age or bothOperating system providers must make available a real-time interface that sends developers an age-bracket signal: under 13, 13 to 15, 16 to 17, or 18 and over+4more
active supreme-court federal Enacted July 1, 2024
Supreme Court case challenging Texas HB 20's restrictions on social media content moderation, decided together with the Florida case Moody v. NetChoice; the Court vacated both judgments and remanded without ruling on the laws' constitutionality
Legal Impact: Vacated the Fifth and Eleventh Circuit judgments for failure to analyze the facial challenges properly, and set out how the First Amendment applies to platform editorial decisions for the courts on remand
Key Issues:facial-challenge-analysiseditorial-judgment-protection+2more
Legal Context:circuit-split-resolutionstate-federal-conflict+1more
active federal-statute federal Enacted April 24, 2024
Federal law requiring ByteDance to divest TikTok or face prohibition from US app stores and web hosting services.
Legal Impact: The first federal statute to condition a named digital platform's continued US availability on divestiture from foreign ownership; the Supreme Court sustained it as applied to TikTok in January 2025.
Key Issues:forced-divestitureapp-store-prohibition+3more
Legal Context:tiktok-inc-v-garlandfirst-amendment-challenges+1more
active supreme-court federal Enacted May 18, 2023
Supreme Court case addressing Section 230 immunity for algorithmic content recommendations
Legal Impact: Avoided ruling on core Section 230 protections for platform recommendation algorithms
Key Issues:algorithmic-recommendation-immunitysection-230-interpretation+1more
Legal Context:section-230-scopealgorithmic-liability
active state-law state-texas Enacted September 9, 2021
Texas law prohibiting large social media platforms from restricting or removing content based on user viewpoint
Legal Impact: Would restrict content moderation by platforms with over 50 million monthly active users in the United States, raising questions about the application of First Amendment protections to platform editorial decisions; its core provisions remain in litigation
Key Issues:Prohibits restricting or removing content based on user viewpointRequires a published acceptable use policy and a biannual transparency report on enforcement actions+2more
Legal Context:NetChoice v. Paxton (5th Circuit vacated the preliminary injunction, September 2022)Moody v. NetChoice (Supreme Court vacated and remanded both judgments, July 2024)+1more
active state-law state-florida Enacted May 24, 2021
Florida law restricting social media platforms from deplatforming political candidates and requiring content moderation transparency
Legal Impact: Among the earliest state laws to regulate platform moderation of political content; its core content-moderation and individualized-explanation provisions have been preliminarily enjoined since June 2021 and remain in litigation
Key Issues:Prohibits deplatforming political candidates$250,000 daily fines for deplatforming statewide candidates; $25,000/day for other candidates+2more
Legal Context:NetChoice v. Attorney General, State of Florida (11th Circuit affirmed the preliminary injunction in part, 2022)Moody v. NetChoice (Supreme Court vacated and remanded, July 2024)+1more
active state-law state-maryland Enacted May 2018
Maryland state law requiring disclosure and recordkeeping for online political advertisements, establishing transparency requirements for digital platforms.
Legal Impact: State regulation of online political advertising whose publication and inspection requirements the Fourth Circuit held unconstitutional as applied to news organizations.
Key Issues:platform-publication-requirement48-hour-publication-window+3more
Legal Context:constitutional-challengefirst-amendment-violation
active federal-statute federal Enacted April 11, 2018
Federal statute creating an exception to Section 230 immunity for claims and prosecutions arising from sex trafficking, and a new federal offense of promoting or facilitating prostitution through an interactive computer service
Legal Impact: First statutory carve-out from Section 230 protections, followed by content moderation changes and platform closures
Key Issues:Creates 18 U.S.C. § 2421A, a federal crime of owning or operating an interactive computer service with intent to promote or facilitate the prostitution of another personAdds 47 U.S.C. § 230(e)(5), removing Section 230 as a defense to civil claims under 18 U.S.C. § 1595 where the underlying conduct violates the sex trafficking statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1591+4more
Legal Context:Woodhull Freedom Foundation v. United States (First Amendment challenge)Criticism from sex worker advocacy groups+1more
active supreme-court federal Enacted June 19, 2017
Supreme Court ruling striking down a North Carolina statute barring registered sex offenders from accessing social media, on the ground that it burdened substantially more speech than necessary
Legal Impact: Struck down a broad state ban on social media access by registered sex offenders under intermediate scrutiny, and supplied a standard later courts have applied to government restrictions on social media access
Key Issues:social-media-access-protectionmodern-public-square-doctrine+2more
amended regulatory-ruling federal Enacted February 26, 2015
FCC order reclassifying broadband as a Title II telecommunications service and establishing net neutrality rules
Legal Impact: Prohibited ISPs from blocking, throttling, or creating paid prioritization for internet traffic
Key Issues:No blocking of legal content, applications, or servicesNo throttling of lawful internet traffic+2more
Legal Context:Upheld against ISP petitions for review in United States Telecom Association v. FCC (D.C. Cir. 2016)Superseded by the FCC's own 2017 Restoring Internet Freedom Order, adopted December 14, 2017+1more
active supreme-court federal Enacted April 2, 2014
Supreme Court decision striking down the biennial aggregate limits on individual campaign contributions while leaving per-recipient base limits in place.
Legal Impact: Removed the cap on the total an individual may contribute across all federal candidates and committees in a two-year cycle; per-recipient base limits remain in force.
Key Issues:aggregate-limits-removalbase-limits-preserved+2more
Legal Context:constitutional-challengecampaign-finance-reform
active supreme-court federal Enacted January 21, 2010
Supreme Court ruling that political spending by corporations and unions is protected speech under the First Amendment
Legal Impact: Changed campaign finance by allowing unlimited independent political expenditures by corporations and unions
Key Issues:Corporate funding of independent political broadcasts cannot be limited under the First AmendmentDisclosure requirements for political advertising upheld+1more
Legal Context:Multiple proposed constitutional amendments to overturnVarious state and local campaign finance reform efforts+1more
amended supreme-court federal Enacted December 10, 2003
Supreme Court decision upholding most provisions of the McCain-Feingold Act, including restrictions on electioneering communications via broadcast, cable, and satellite and the soft money ban.
Legal Impact: Sustained the constitutionality of electioneering communications restrictions covering broadcast, cable, and satellite, along with disclosure requirements and the soft money ban.
Key Issues:electioneering-communications-definitionsoft-money-ban+3more
Legal Context:citizens-united-partial-overturnspeechnow-org-challenge+1more
active supreme-court federal Enacted June 26, 1997
Supreme Court ruling striking down anti-indecency provisions of the Communications Decency Act, establishing First Amendment protections for online speech
Legal Impact: Established that the internet is subject to the highest level of First Amendment protection and struck down provisions criminalizing transmission of indecent material to minors online
Key Issues:internet-first-amendment-protectionindecency-regulation-unconstitutional+1more
active federal-statute federal Enacted 1996
Provides immunity to online platforms from liability for user-generated content while allowing them to moderate content in good faith
Legal Impact: Federal statute providing liability immunity for online platforms regarding user-generated content, enabling the growth of social media platforms, forums, and content-sharing services
Key Issues:No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content providerGood Samaritan provision allowing platforms to restrict access to objectionable material+1more
Legal Context:Multiple congressional proposals to reform or repealExecutive Order on Preventing Online Censorship (2020)+1more
active federal-statute federal Enacted June 19, 1934
Federal statute requiring a broadcast station that lets one legally qualified candidate use its airtime to offer equal opportunities to that candidate's opponents, with exemptions for bona fide news programming
Legal Impact: Governs how broadcast television and radio stations handle candidate appearances and political advertising, including the free time, rates, and public records owed to opposing candidates; it does not reach cable channels or online distribution
Key Issues:A licensee that permits a legally qualified candidate to use its station must afford equal opportunities to all other candidates for the same office (§ 315(a))The licensee has no power of censorship over material broadcast by a candidate, and is not obliged to allow any candidate to use its station+4more
Legal Context:1959 FCC ruling on a complaint by Chicago mayoral candidate Lar Daly, which treated newscast appearances as a 'use'; Congress overrode it with the 1959 news exemptionsPub. L. 86-677 (1960) suspended the equal opportunities requirement for the 1960 presidential and vice-presidential general election campaigns+1more