The Walker Montgomery Protecting Children Online Act

Last updated
The Walker Montgomery Protecting Children Online Act
Seal of Mississippi.svg
Mississippi Legislature
  • AN ACT TO CREATE THE "WALKER MONTGOMERY PROTECTING CHILDREN ONLINE ACT" FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROTECTING MINOR CHILDREN FROM ONLINE HARMFUL MATERIAL AND ACCESS TO SUCH MATERIAL; TO REQUIRE DIGITAL SERVICE USERS TO REGISTER THEIR AGE; TO LIMIT THE COLLECTION AND USE OF MINOR USERS' PERSONAL IDENTIFYING INFORMATION; TO REQUIRE DIGITAL SERVICES PROVIDERS TO DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT A STRATEGY TO PREVENT OR MITIGATE CERTAIN HARMS TO MINORS; TO AMEND SECTION 75-24-5, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO PROVIDE THAT A VIOLATION OF THIS ACT IS AN UNFAIR AND DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICE THAT IS ENFORCEABLE BY THE OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL; TO AMEND SECTION 97-5-31, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO INCLUDE MORPHED IMAGES OF DEPICTING MINOR CHILDREN IN EXPLICIT NATURE IN THE CRIME OF CHILD EXPLOITATION; AND FOR RELATED PURPOSES.
Territorial extentState of Mississippi
Signedsigned on April 30, 2024 by Governor Tate Reeves
Effective July 1, 2024
Legislative history
IntroducedFebruary 14, 2024
PassedMarch 12, 2024
Voting summary
  • 121 Mississippi Representatives voted for
  • 0 Mississippi Representatives voted against
PassedApril 8, 2024
Voting summary
  • 49 Mississippi Senators voted for
  • 0 Mississippi Senators voted against
Status: Blocked

The Walker Montgomery Protecting Children Online Act or HB 1126 is an American law in the state of Mississippi. The bill had passed with no votes against it in both the senate and house in the state. [1] [2] [3] [4]

Contents

Bill Summary

The law applies to digital services that allows users to make content on public or semi-public profiles which can be signed into and allows sharing that content on a message board, chat room or landing page, video channel or main feed.

However, it doesn't apply to news sources, online games or the content that is be made is by the service itself or is an application website. These services must also verify the age of users by a "commercially reasonable effort" and if the user is under 18 years of age, they must get the consent from a parent or guardian.

Digital services must also limit collection of the known minor's personal identifying information to information reasonably necessary and limit the use of the known minor's personal identifying information as well as limit targeted advertising of harmful material to minors.

It also requires digital services to moderate content that promotes or facilitates the following, that is consistent with evidence-informed medical information self-harm, eating disorders, substance use disorders, and suicidal behaviors, Patterns of use that indicate or encourage, substance abuse or use of illegal drugs, Stalking, physical violence, online bullying, or harassment, grooming, trafficking, child pornography, or other sexual exploitation or abuse; Incitement of violence; or any other illegal activity. [5] [6] [4]

Lawsuit

NetChoice v. Flitch

Southern District Court of Mississippi

On June 7, 2024, The trade associations NetChoice filed a lawsuit against Attorney General Lynn Flitch to The Southern District Court of Mississippi. [7] [8] The Electronic Frontier Foundation would file a brief for the case on June 18, 2024. [9] The law would later be enjoined on July 1, 2024, by Judge Halil Suleyman Ozerden for likely violating the first amendment but didn't doubt the good intentions of the law. [10] [11] [12]

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

The case was later appealed to The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals on July 5, 2024 and in October 2024 The American Civil Liberties Union, Electronic Frontier Foundation, TechFreedom,Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression,Chamber of Progress, LGBT Tech and Woodhull Freedom Foundation would file briefs for the case. [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] The case is currently ongoing in the Fifth Circuit.

Related Research Articles

Stardust William David Blumenfeld Doherty is the former executive director of the Verified Voting Foundation and VerifiedVoting.org and was the originator of the Election Incident Reporting System, used to detect over 40,000 problems with the 2004 U.S. Presidential Election and to ensure that all legally qualified voters would have the opportunity to vote.

Electronic Frontiers Georgia (EFGA) is a non-profit organization in the US state of Georgia focusing on issues related to cyber law and free speech. It was founded in 1995 by Tom Cross, Robert Costner, Chris Farris, and Robbie Honerkamp, primarily in response to the Communications Decency Act.

<i>Hepting v. AT&T</i>

Hepting v. AT&T, 439 F.Supp.2d 974, was a class action lawsuit argued before the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, filed by Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) on behalf of customers of the telecommunications company AT&T. The plaintiffs alleged that AT&T permitted and assisted the National Security Agency (NSA) in unlawfully monitoring the personal communications of American citizens, including AT&T customers, whose communications were routed through AT&T's network.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Room 641A</span> Telecommunication interception facility

Room 641A is a telecommunication interception facility operated by AT&T for the U.S. National Security Agency, as part of its warrantless surveillance program as authorized by the Patriot Act. The facility commenced operations in 2003 and its purpose was publicly revealed by AT&T technician Mark Klein in 2006.

Arts and media industry trade groups, such as the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) and Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), strongly oppose and attempt to prevent copyright infringement through file sharing. The organizations particularly target the distribution of files via the Internet using peer-to-peer software. Efforts by trade groups to curb such infringement have been unsuccessful with chronic, widespread and rampant infringement continuing largely unabated.

File sharing is the practice of distributing or providing access to digital media, such as computer programs, multimedia, program files, documents or electronic books/magazines. It involves various legal aspects as it is often used to exchange data that is copyrighted or licensed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Doe v. Gonzales</span> 2004 US lawsuit

John Doe v. Alberto R. Gonzales was a case in which the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), Library Connection, and several then-pseudonymous librarians, challenged Section 2709 of the Patriot Act; it was consolidated on appeal with a separate case, Doe v. Ashcroft.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is an international non-profit digital rights group based in San Francisco, California. It was founded in 1990 to promote Internet civil liberties.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is an international non-profit advocacy and legal organization based in the United States and serves its operations worldwide.

<i>Nitke v. Gonzales</i> American legal case

Nitke v. Gonzalez, 413 F.Supp.2d 262 was a United States District Court for the Southern District of New York case regarding obscene materials published online. The plaintiff challenged the constitutionality of the obscenity provision of the Communications Decency Act (CDA). She claimed that it was overbroad when applied in the context of the Internet because certain contents deemed lawful in some communities and unlawful in others will be restricted due to the open access of the Internet. The plaintiff also sought a permanent injunction against the enforcement of the obscenity provision of the CDA. The court concluded that insufficient evidence was presented to show there was substantial variation in community standards, as applied in the "Miller test", and to show how much protected speech would actually be impaired because of these differences. The relief sought was denied, and the court ruled for the defendant. The Supreme Court subsequently affirmed this ruling without comment.

United States v. Fricosu, 841 F.Supp.2d 1232, is a federal criminal case in Colorado that addressed whether a person can be compelled to reveal his or her encryption passphrase or password, despite the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination. On January 23, 2012, judge Robert E. Blackburn held that under the All Writs Act, Fricosu is required to produce an unencrypted hard drive.

<i>Craigslist Inc. v. 3Taps Inc.</i> 2013 Northern District of California Court case

Craigslist Inc. v. 3Taps Inc., 942 F.Supp.2d 962 was a Northern District of California Court case in which the court held that sending a cease-and-desist letter and enacting an IP address block is sufficient notice of online trespassing, which a plaintiff can use to claim a violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

<i>In re Application of the United States for Historical Cell Site Data</i>

In re Application of the United States for Historical Cell Site Data, 724 F.3d 600, was a case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that the government can access cell site records without a warrant. Specifically, the court held that court orders under the Stored Communications Act compelling cell phone providers to disclose historical cell site information are not per se unconstitutional.

<i>Wikimedia Foundation v. NSA</i> Lawsuit against the U.S. National Security Agency

Wikimedia Foundation, et al. v. National Security Agency, et al. was a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation and several other organizations against the National Security Agency (NSA), the United States Department of Justice (DOJ), and other named individuals, alleging mass surveillance of Wikipedia users carried out by the NSA. The suit claims the surveillance system, which NSA calls "Upstream", breaches the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which protects freedom of speech, and the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures.

Microsoft Corp. v. United States, known on appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court as United States v. Microsoft Corp., 584 U.S. ___, 138 S. Ct. 1186 (2018), was a data privacy case involving the extraterritoriality of law enforcement seeking electronic data under the 1986 Stored Communications Act (SCA), Title II of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA), in light of modern computing and Internet technologies such as data centers and cloud storage.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Marcia Hofmann</span> American attorney

Marcia Clare Hofmann is an American attorney and US-UK Fulbright Scholar. Hofmann is known for her work as an advocate of electronic privacy and free expression, including defending individuals charged with high-profile computer crimes, such as Marcus Hutchins and Weev.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Andrew Oldham</span> American federal judge (born 1978)

Andrew Stephen Oldham is an American lawyer and jurist serving since 2018 as a United States circuit judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. He previously was the general counsel to Texas Governor Greg Abbott.

NetChoice is a trade association of online businesses that advocates for free expression and free enterprise on the internet. It currently has six active First Amendment lawsuits over state-level internet regulations, including NetChoice v. Paxton, Moody v. NetChoice, NetChoice v. Bonta and NetChoice v. Yost.

<i>Force v. Facebook, Inc.</i> 2019 US appeals court decision

Force v. Facebook, Inc., 934 F.3d 53 was a 2019 decision by the US Second Circuit Appeals Court holding that Section 230 bars civil terrorism claims against social media companies and internet service providers, the first federal appellate court to do so.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social Media Age Verification Laws In The United States</span>

In 2022 California passed The California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act or AB 2273 which requires websites that are likely to be used by minors to estimate visitors ages to give them some amount of privacy control and on March 23, 2023, Utah Governor Spencer Cox signed SB 152 and HB 311 collective known as the Utah Social Media Regulation Act which requires age verification and if they are under 18 they have to get parental consent before making an account on any social media platform. Since then multiple bills have been introduced or passed in multiple states however very few gone into effect mainly due to court challenges including both laws in California and Utah.

References

  1. "HB 1126 - History of Actions/Background (state.ms.us)".
  2. "0980025.pdf (state.ms.us)" (PDF).
  3. "0710014.pdf (state.ms.us)" (PDF).
  4. 1 2 "HB1126SG.pdf (state.ms.us)" (PDF).
  5. "HB1126 (As Sent to Governor) - 2024 Regular Session". billstatus.ls.state.ms.us.
  6. Ballard, Toren (April 22, 2024). "House Bill 1126: Walker Montgomery Protecting Children Online Act". Mississippi First.
  7. "NetChoice Sues Mississippi to Block Youth Social Media Law (1)".
  8. "NetChoice-v.-Fitch_-AS-FILED_Complaint_june-7.pdf" (PDF).
  9. "NetChoice v. Fitch - EFF amicus brief". Electronic Frontier Foundation. June 27, 2024.
  10. "Federal judge halts Mississippi law requiring age verification for websites". AP News. July 1, 2024.
  11. Feiner, Lauren (July 2, 2024). "Judge blocks Mississippi law that required age verification on social media". The Verge.
  12. "NetChoice-v-Fitch-District-Court-Preliminary-Injuction-Ruling-July-1-2024.pdf" (PDF).
  13. Chamber of Progress Brief
  14. FIRE Brief
  15. "NetChoice v. Fitch 24-60341 | U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit | Justia".
  16. "NetChoice, L.L.C. v Lynn Fitch-EFF Amicus in Fifth Circuit". Electronic Frontier Foundation. October 4, 2024.
  17. "NetChoice-v.-Fitch-5th-Cir-24-60341.pdf (techfreedom.org)" (PDF).
  18. https://www.woodhullfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Fitch-Amicus-Brief.pdf
  19. "2024-10-03_eff_aclu_aclu-ms_amicus_curiae_brief.pdf" (PDF).