On 9 February 2026, NetChoice filed a lawsuit challenging the South Carolina Age-Appropriate Code Design Act. The plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive relief, alleging that the legislation imposes an unlawful censorship regime that fundamentally controls how websites present information to users. NetChoice alleges that the Act’s requirement to prevent harms to minors forces platforms to make content-based judgments in violation of the First Amendment, regardless of the Act's characterisation of certain speech as a tort. The plaintiff also contends that the Act is unconstitutionally vague and lacks clear definitions for important terms like design features, granting state officials allegedly near-boundless enforcement discretion. NetChoice further argues that the legislation is preempted by federal laws, specifically Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) regarding third-party content and the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) regarding data use. The complaint also highlights violations of the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution by imposing burdens on interstate commerce, as well as the Due Process Clause, noting that the act took effect immediately without providing services a reasonable opportunity to comply. Furthermore, the plaintiff objects to the Act's mandate for content-shaping controls to be enabled by default for minors, as well as the liability imposed on websites that facilitate protected commercial speech for products prohibited for minors, which requires extensive monitoring of automated advertising systems. NetChoice alleges that this requirement pressures websites to block lawful ads and speakers altogether to avoid liability. The litigation also challenges provisions requiring third-party audits, which it considers intrusive, and the submission of reports to the Attorney General for public dissemination. The plaintiff notes that the Act impacts NetChoice members and their covered services as well, including Amazon, Google, Meta, and TikTok.
Original source