ATLANTA—Today, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia will hear NetChoice’s request to halt Georgia SB 351 and protect free speech and digital safety as our case, NetChoice v. Carr, proceeds through the legal system.
The hearing begins at 2:30 PM Eastern Time in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. There is not a livestream available.
“SB 351 violates the First Amendment. Forcing all Georgians to hand over sensitive documents just to access websites creates unnecessary barriers to lawful speech, endangers cybersecurity and chills free expression,” said Paul Taske, NetChoice Associate Director of Litigation. “We appreciate the court’s consideration and are confident the court will stop this unconstitutional infringement on speech from taking effect. NetChoice will continue fighting to keep the internet safe and secure for speech and innovation, free from government censorship.”
Read NetChoice’s request for a preliminary injunction here, and learn more about NetChoice v. Carr here.
Please contact press@netchoice.org with inquiries.
Top Takeaways of NetChoice v. Carr (2025):
- Blocking access to protected speech online violates the First Amendment: Georgia’s government passed a law, SB 351, conditioning access to protected speech online on whether users are willing to forfeit sensitive documentation to digital services. This violates First Amendment rights and will result in Georgians losing access to legitimate speech online. The courts agree—NetChoice has successfully permanently blocked two similar laws in Arkansas and Ohio.
- Georgia’s law poses a serious threat to cybersecurity and online safety: By mandating that users go through identity verification processes, Georgia’s government unintentionally risks the security of all their citizens—especially minors—by putting their most sensitive documents and information into a honeypot for online predators and cybercriminals to exploit.
- It prevents social media from providing family-friendly advertising: By prohibiting the ability of social media websites to disseminate personalized ads, this law actively makes it more difficult for social media companies to take steps to ensure that minors are shown content that is appropriate.
- SB 351 usurps parents and seizes their role for the State: Parents and guardians are best situated to determine their family’s online presence—not big government red tape that puts safety, security and free speech in jeopardy.