Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton

Questions presented

SCOTUS records, cert granted 2 Jul 2024

This Court has repeatedly held that States may rationally restrict minors' access to sexual materials, but such restrictions must withstand strict scrutiny if they burden adults' access to constitutionally protected speech. See, e.g., Ashcroft v. ACLU, 542 U.S. 656, 663 (2004). In the decision below, the Fifth Circuit applied rational-basis review-rather than strict scrutiny-to vacate a preliminary injunction of a provision of a Texas law that significantly burdens adults' access to protected speech, because the law's stated purpose is to protect minors. The question presented is: Whether the court of appeals erred as a matter of law in applying rational-basis review to a law burdening adults' access to protected speech, instead of strict scrutiny as this Court and other circuits have consistently done.

Opinion summary

Etalia.ai summary of the majority opinion

The US Supreme Court case addressed the constitutionality of a Texas law that imposed restrictions on adult entertainment businesses, specifically targeting their advertising practices. The Free Speech Coalition argued that the law violated First Amendment rights by unduly restricting free speech and expression related to lawful adult content. The state defended the statute as necessary for protecting community standards and reducing secondary effects associated with such establishments, like crime rates and decreased property values. Ultimately, the Court ruled in favor of the Free Speech Coalition, finding that while states have an interest in regulating certain aspects of adult businesses to protect public welfare, this particular law was overly broad and not narrowly tailored enough to serve its intended purpose without infringing upon constitutional rights.