We will hear argument this morning in case 231122 Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton.

Mr. Schaefer.

Thank you, Mr. Chief Justice, and may it please the Court.

In this case, a Fifth Circuit majority held that mere rational basis review, the most lax form

of judicial scrutiny, applies to a Texas law that burdens constitutionally protected speech based on

its content, specifically by imposing an age verification barrier before anyone can access

a sexually themed website. That aberrant holding defies this Court's consistent precedent,

including its Ashcroft decision, as Judge Higginbotham well explained in his

dissent.

This Court should begin by confirming that strict scrutiny continues to apply to any such content-based

burden on websites and their adult users.

Notably, Texas' law is even more problematic than its failed federal predecessors.

It applies to entire websites, depending on whether one-third of their content is deemed inappropriate for minors.

It also brands websites with stigmatizing unscientific so-called health warnings that, despite being enjoined,

evidence Texas' intention to deter adults, even assuming they've cleared the age verification hurdle,

from accessing protected speech.

To abandon strict scrutiny here, Your Honors, could open the door to an emerging wave

of regulations that imperil free speech online.

From there, this Court can readily restore the preliminary injunction given petitioner's likelihood of success under strict scrutiny.

The District Court found that this law's age verification provisions are wildly under-inclusive and unduly chilling.

At the same time, content filtering today affords at least one alternative that is both less restrictive and more efficacious.

Ashcroft teaches that a preliminary injunction should stand in precisely these circumstances.

...