On May 13, Governor Katie Hobbs signed HB 2112 into law, officially adding Arizona to a growing list of states that require adult websites to implement age verification measures. While intended to prevent minors from accessing sexually explicit content, state AV laws such as Arizona’s have sparked significant concerns among civil liberties advocates and adult industry stakeholders..
Sponsored by state Rep. Nick Kupper, the new law mandates that websites on which more than one-third of the content is “sexual material harmful to minors” must use “reasonable” age verification methods to ensure users are at least 18 years old. These methods can include digital identification or commercial age verification systems. The bill specifies that such systems should not retain or transmit any identifying personal information of users to government entities.
Critics contend that age verification laws, particularly those requiring government-issued IDs or sensitive personal data, impose an undue burden on adults’ access to constitutionally protected speech, even if that speech is sexually explicit.
Proponents, including Rep. Kupper, argue that the law is a necessary step to shield children from harmful online content. He emphasized that the law places responsibility on adult companies and provides parents with a legal avenue to hold them accountable.
“Hardcore pornography has been just one click away from kids for too long, and the companies behind it have looked the other way while cashing in,” Kupper stated.
Under the law, parents whose children access explicit content due to a site’s failure to verify age can pursue civil action, with potential penalties for noncompliant companies reaching up to $10,000 per day and an additional $250,000 if a minor gains access.
The law will take effect 90 days after the adjournment of the 2025 legislative session.
Second Time Around: The Governor’s Prior Veto
Hobbs’ signing of HB 2112 marks a significant shift, as the governor previously vetoed a similar age verification bill in 2024. In her veto message for that bill, HB 2586, Hobbs cited concerns that the bill conflicted with settled case law, and that any solution to children’s online safety “should be bipartisan and work within the bounds of the First Amendment.”
That earlier bill faced strong opposition from civil liberties groups like the ACLU of Arizona and the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), who argued it would violate the First Amendment rights of adults and potentially lead to intrusive identity verification demands. They contended that requiring adults to submit personal identification to access constitutionally protected speech, such as adult content, infringes on anonymity and creates a pathway for government surveillance.
Hobbs’ decision to sign HB 2112 may have been influenced by a variety of factors, including a shift in the political calculus surrounding online child safety. Hobbs will be up for reelection in 2026, and increasing public pressure on states to address online child safety may have played a role in the governor’s decision-making process on this increasingly high-profile issue.
Constitutionality Under Scrutiny
Like similar AV laws in other states, Arizona’s HB 2112 faces significant legal hurdles and is widely expected to be challenged in court.
The primary argument against such legislation rests on the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which protects freedom of speech. Critics contend that age verification laws, particularly those requiring government-issued IDs or sensitive personal data, impose an undue burden on adults’ access to constitutionally protected speech, even if that speech is sexually explicit.
Furthermore, privacy advocates raise concerns about the practical implications of age verification. The collection of sensitive personal information by third-party verification services raises the issue of data breaches, identity theft and the erosion of online anonymity. The very act of requiring an ID to access certain websites could deter adults from viewing lawful content, creating a “chilling effect” on free expression. Such systems, privacy advocates argue, transform anonymous internet browsing into a potentially surveilled activity, eroding a fundamental aspect of online freedom.
SCOTUS Decision a Potential Game Changer
While Arizona’s HB 2112 is set to become law, its ultimate fate and enforceability could hinge upon ongoing legal battles over this issue. In particular, the Supreme Court’s decision in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, the case challenging Texas’s similar age verification law, HB 1181, will be pivotal in determining the future of age verification mandates.
As of this writing, the court has not yet handed down its decision in the case. Should the court affirm a strict scrutiny standard for such laws, Arizona’s HB 2112 and similar state laws could face an uphill battle to withstand constitutional challenges.
The question before the Supreme Court centers on the constitutional standard of review that should be applied to such laws, and whether the Texas law constitutes a “content-based restriction” on speech. When laws are classified as such, courts typically apply “strict scrutiny,” the highest level of judicial review. In that case, the state must not only demonstrate a compelling governmental interest — e.g., protecting minors — but also show that the law is narrowly tailored to achieve that interest, employing the least restrictive means possible.
Opponents of AV laws argue that less restrictive alternatives, such as parental control software or robust educational initiatives, are more effective without infringing on adults’ rights.
A federal district court initially blocked the Texas law, applying the “strict scrutiny” standard, but the United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit reversed that decision, applying the less stringent “rational basis” standard of review, which requires only that the law must have a legitimate state interest with a rational connection.
A Supreme Court ruling in favor of the application of strict scrutiny would set a powerful precedent, potentially invalidating not only Texas’ law but also similar AV laws in Arizona and more than a dozen other states. If the court upholds the 5th Circuit’s more lenient standard, it would bolster the legal foundation for these state-level age verification requirements, potentially encouraging even more states to enact similar legislation.
Ongoing Concerns and Future Implications
The legal battles surrounding age verification laws highlight a broader tension between child protection, adult privacy and First Amendment rights in the digital age.
Some experts suggest that these laws may not be effective in their stated goal of preventing minors from accessing adult content. Research on similar laws in other states indicate that traffic to compliant websites may decrease, while users migrate to less regulated or entirely noncompliant platforms, or utilize virtual private networks to circumvent geographic restrictions. This could inadvertently push users toward riskier corners of the internet with fewer safeguards.
Some major adult content platforms have blocked access to users in states with AV laws in place, opting to avoid the legal and logistical complexities of attempting compliance. With Arizona’s new law expected to take effect in the coming months, its impact and any resulting legal challenges will be closely watched.
This article does not constitute legal advice and is provided for information purposes only.
Corey D. Silverstein is the managing and founding member of Silverstein Legal. His practice focuses on representing all areas of the adult industry and his clientele includes hosting companies, affiliate programs, content producers, processors, designers, developers, operators and more. He is licensed in numerous jurisdictions. Contact him via MyAdultAttorney.com, corey@silversteinlegal.com or (248) 290-0655.
