RICHMOND, Va. — The Fourth Circuit heard arguments Wednesday on whether the Virginia social media law that restricts minors’ access to platforms runs afoul of the First Amendment.
The hearing came after U.S. District Judge Patricia Giles, a Joe Biden appointee, issued a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement. In granting the injunction, Giles agreed with NetChoice, a trade group representing online services including X, YouTube, Netflix, Google, Amazon and TikTok, that the measure likely violates constitutional free speech protections.
Virginia social media law limits screen time
Enacted on a bipartisan basis in 2025, the statute requires platforms to cap users under 16 at one hour of use per platform per day. Parents may adjust their children’s limits up or down. Courts have halted comparable laws in Louisiana, Arkansas, Ohio, Georgia, Utah and Texas.
Solicitor General Tillman Breckenridge argued Virginia’s approach is distinct and narrowly tailored. Breckenridge maintained the commonwealth has a duty to shield young people from the harms of social media addiction.
“It changes children’s brains,” he said, adding that Virginia’s response is measured and aimed at curbing excessive exposure to the format.
NetChoice countered that concerns about addiction do not justify the restriction. The association warned that, under the state’s logic, Virginia could impose daily caps on minors for other media such as video games, streaming services, e-readers or podcasts, based on predictions that too much of such speech is harmful.
“The First Amendment does not give Virginia that remarkable power,” the group argued in its brief.
Judges probe parental role and selectivity
U.S. Circuit Judge Roger Gregory pressed NetChoice on the state’s responsibility to protect children from harms tied to prolonged social media use. “We’re talking about children,” the George W. Bush appointee said, noting that Virginia has a duty to try to protect people.
NetChoice attorney Erin Murphy of Clement Murphy responded that parents, not the state, should make those decisions. “Parents can tell their children, ‘you can’t have any time on this service,’” she said, adding that identifying a harm does not negate First Amendment limits.
Murphy pointed to earlier government efforts to limit minors’ exposure to certain media, including television and violent video games, arguing this is not the first time officials have raised concerns about a new medium’s impact on youth development.
NetChoice also asserted that the law’s definition of a social media platform is not content-neutral, noting that other services that distribute news, sports and entertainment, such as ESPN’s website, fall outside the statute. Breckenridge replied that the law regulates minors’ access to platforms, not the content those platforms host.
U.S. Circuit Judge Harvie Wilkinson, a Ronald Reagan appointee, acknowledged the state’s interest in protecting minors but questioned whether the statute burdens minors’ First Amendment rights, invoking George Orwell’s “1984.” “The state is going right into the family living room and requiring parents to affirmatively consent,” he said.
“Is this an impermissible invasion of a family relationship and an intrusion into the very heart of a home?” Wilkinson also echoed concerns about the law’s selective reach, asking whether allowing the state to pick and choose covered services risks viewpoint-based regulation in future laws.
Research and panel composition
The court referenced research indicating potential neurological effects tied to early and habitual social media use. One study of 169 middle school students found that frequent use in early adolescence may be associated with changes in neural sensitivity to anticipated social rewards and punishments, with implications for psychological adjustment.
U.S. Circuit Judge DeAndrea Benjamin, a Biden appointee, completed the three-judge panel. NetChoice and its counsel did not respond to a request for comment, and the Office of the Attorney General declined to comment.
Earlier this year, a similar clash over religion and speech emerged in litigation surrounding the Texas Ten Commandments law and the establishment clause.
The trade group NetChoice maintains a public list of member companies, including major platforms such as Netflix and Amazon, which could be affected by Virginia’s statutory limits on minors’ use.
The Office of the Attorney General, which defends Virginia statutes in court, operates through the Virginia Office of the Attorney General.