In a bold legal move, a nonprofit trade association representing major internet companies has filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Virginia’s Senate Bill 854. The bill, which imposes restrictions on minors’ access to social media platforms, is being contested by NetChoice in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia as of November 17, 2025. The defendant in this case is Jason S. Miyares, Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Virginia.
The complaint argues that SB 854 violates the First Amendment by requiring social media platforms to verify users’ ages and restrict minors under 16 from accessing these sites for more than an hour per day without parental consent. NetChoice contends that such measures infringe upon both minors’ and adults’ rights to free speech and expression online. The plaintiff cites past cases where similar state efforts were struck down as unconstitutional, emphasizing that decisions about what content is appropriate for minors should rest with parents rather than the government.
NetChoice’s members include prominent platforms like YouTube, Meta Platforms (which owns Facebook and Instagram), Reddit Inc., and Dreamwidth Studios. These companies argue that SB 854 not only burdens their operations with costly compliance requirements but also restricts their ability to curate and disseminate content—a core aspect of their First Amendment rights. The complaint highlights how these platforms offer various tools for parents to control their children’s online activities, questioning the necessity of state-imposed restrictions.
The plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive relief from the court to prevent enforcement of SB 854, arguing that it places undue burdens on both users and service providers while failing to address any specific harm posed by social media use among minors. They assert that existing parental controls are sufficient for managing children’s online experiences without infringing on constitutional rights.
Representing NetChoice in this case are attorneys from prominent law firms specializing in constitutional law. The presiding judge is yet to be determined, but the case has been assigned Case ID 1:25-cv-02067.
Source: 125cv02067_Netchoice_v_Miyares_Complaint_Eastern_District_Virginia.pdf
