紐時賞析／密西西比兒童社羣管制法暫時生效

最高法院的先例保障了孩童和社羣媒體網站關於憲法第一修正案的權力。（紐約時報）

生成式AI闖進校園！聯合新聞網正在調查「大學生使用生成式AI工具的習慣」，誠摯邀請各科系大學、碩博士學生填寫問卷。 ➡️點擊填答

Mississippi Can Limit Children’s Social Media Access

密西西比兒童社羣管制法暫時生效

The Supreme Court on Thursday refused to block a Mississippi law barring minors from using social media sites including Facebook, Instagram, Reddit, Snapchat, YouTube and X without their parents’ consent.

美國聯邦最高法院週四拒絕暫停一項密西西比州法律，該法禁止未成年人在未獲父母同意的情況下使用 Facebook、Instagram、Reddit、Snapchat、YouTube與X等社羣媒體。

The court’s brief order was unsigned and gave no reasons, which is typical when the justices act on emergency applications. The order was not the last word in the case, which will proceed in a federal appeals court and may again reach the justices.

最高法院的簡短裁定未署名，也未說明理由，這在大法官處理緊急聲請時相當常見。這項裁定並非案件的最終結果，訴訟仍將在聯邦上訴法院進行，未來也可能再回到最高法院審理。

The challenged law, enacted last year, seeks to limit minors’ access to sites allowing them “to socially interact with other users.” Lawmakers said they sought to protect children from sex trafficking, sexual abuse, violence, grooming and harassment. More generally, they said, they were concerned about the harmful effects of social media use on young people.

這項具爭議的法律於去年通過，旨在限制未成年人使用允許「與其他用戶社交互動」的平臺。立法者表示，他們希望保護兒童免於性交易、性虐待、暴力、誘拐與騷擾的危害，更廣泛地說，他們關心社羣媒體對青少年的負面影響。

The law does not apply to sites mainly devoted to news, sports, commerce or video games. It also exempts email and direct messages.

該法不適用於主要內容爲新聞、體育、商業或電玩遊戲的網站，也豁免電子郵件與私人訊息服務。

It requires social media sites to verify users’ ages and to block those younger than 18 unless they have their parents’ permission. Sites that violate the law may be fined $10,000 per incident and could face criminal penalties.

法律規定，社羣平臺必須驗證用戶年齡，並封鎖未滿18歲者，除非獲得父母同意。若違法，平臺每次可被處以1萬美元罰鍰，甚至面臨刑責。

NetChoice, a trade association, challenged the law on behalf of nine social media sites, saying it violated the First Amendment.

代表九家社羣平臺的同業公會NetChoice提出挑戰，認爲此法違反美國憲法第一增修條文。

In a brief concurrence, Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh wrote that he, too, believed the law was “likely unconstitutional” and that NetChoice would most likely succeed in arguing so down the road. But he nonetheless agreed with the court’s conclusion that the company had not so far demonstrated that it would be overwhelmingly harmed by the law temporarily taking effect while the case proceeds through the courts.

大法官卡瓦納在一份簡短的協同意見中寫道，他同樣認爲該法「可能違憲」，而且NetChoice未來很可能勝訴。但他同時同意法院的結論，即目前公司尚未能證明若法律暫時生效，會造成「難以挽回的重大損害」。

About a dozen other states have broadly similar laws. Seven other courts have blocked laws like the one in Mississippi, NetChoice told the justices.

據NetChoice向最高法院指出，目前已有約十多個州通過類似法律，其中七個州的法院已阻止類似密西西比的法案生效。

Judge Halil Suleyman Ozerden issued a preliminary injunction in June blocking the law while the trade group’s challenge moved forward. In a 35-page decision, the judge accepted that “safeguarding the physical and psychological well-being of minors online is an important governmental interest” but ruled that the law appeared to apply to “substantially more speech than is necessary for the state to accomplish its goals.”

今年6月，聯邦地方法官奧澤登曾發出初步禁制令，阻止該法實施，並在35頁的裁定中承認「保障未成年人身心健康是重要的政府利益」，但認爲法律涵蓋的言論「遠超過達成目標所必需的範圍」。

A unanimous three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals paused Ozerden’s injunction, reviving the law.

然而，第五巡迴上訴法院三名法官組成的合議庭一致裁定，暫停奧澤登的禁制令，使法律得以重新生效。

Adam Liptak and Zach Montague　譯／羅方妤