Indiana Age Verification Law: Explaining Senate Bill 17 

Published August 27, 2024

Words by Aiste Joksaite

Share article

The internet is a vast space and unless it is regulated, anyone, including children, can easily encounter explicit content. With the click of a button, minors can stumble upon materials intended for mature audiences, leading to widespread concern among parents and lawmakers alike. This concern has sparked a wave of legislation aimed at protecting minors online, including Indiana’s new law: Senate Bill 17.

Senate Bill 17 

The law mandates that operators of adult-oriented websites displaying material harmful to minors must implement a reasonable age verification method to prevent minors from accessing the site. This requirement is designed to ensure that only adults can view such content, providing an additional layer of protection for minors.

The law also establishes a legal framework allowing parents or guardians of a child harmed by a breach of the age verification requirement to seek monetary damages, injunctive relief, and reasonable attorney’s fees. Additionally, it grants any other individual the right to pursue injunctive relief and attorney’s fees in cases where the age verification process is violated.

To safeguard user privacy, the law prohibits entities conducting age verification from retaining the identifying information of individuals attempting to access these adult-oriented websites. If a person’s identifying information is improperly retained, they are entitled to bring an action to seek monetary damages, injunctive relief, and reasonable attorney’s fees.

The Push for Age Verification Laws

Recently, Indiana made headlines when a judge temporarily blocked a law requiring residents to upload sensitive documents, like a photo ID, to access sites that include adult material. This Indiana law, which is now finally set to go into effect after a federal appeals court decided to let the law take effect, mandates that websites displaying “material harmful to minors” implement strict age verification methods. Failure to do so could result in civil lawsuits from parents and even legal action by the Attorney General.

Supporters of SB 17, such as Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita, argue that such measures are necessary to shield minors from inappropriate content. They believe that by requiring age verification, parents can better control what their children see online, offering an additional layer of protection in an increasingly complex digital world.

The Constitutional Debate: Free Speech vs. Child Protection

While the intent behind SB 17 may be to protect children, critics argue that the law could have significant constitutional implications. Similar to a law enacted in Texas, the Indiana bill has been described as “likely facially unconstitutional” under the First Amendment. Critics, including the judge who initially blocked the legislation, warn that such laws could infringe on adults’ rights to access legal, consensual content online.

In the landmark case Reno v. ACLU, the Supreme Court ruled that age verification requirements could be unconstitutional if less restrictive alternatives, such as parental control filters, are available. This precedent raises concerns that SB 17 might overly burden adults’ freedom to explore and express themselves in a private digital space, affecting free speech. With that in mind, the states that have laws for age verification, outline strict rules against keeping any personal information on the users.

Privacy Concerns: The Risk of Data Breaches

Beyond constitutional issues, SB 17 poses significant privacy concerns. The law requires internet users to share personal information, such as a photo ID, to verify their age. This requirement raises the risk of data breaches, as seen in other sectors like health insurance and retail. Despite mandates that companies delete users’ personal information immediately, there is no guarantee that this data will be adequately protected from hackers or other malicious actors.

Furthermore, the law could inadvertently block access for those without government-issued IDs or those misidentified by the verification technology. This could prevent some adults from accessing legal content, further complicating the issue.

Unintended Consequences: A Look at Other States

Indiana is not alone in its efforts to implement this new age verification law. States like Utah, Texas, Louisiana, and Arkansas have passed functionally identical statutes, often with unintended consequences. For example, in Utah, the passage of a similar bill led PornHub to block access to its site in the state, denying adults access to constitutionally protected material. The company warned that such laws could drive users to less secure sites, potentially exposing them to greater risks.

Many adult content sites are worried about the financial burden of implementing age verification technology. Though it’s worth mentioning that with the right tools, these companies can implement security measures without sacrificing resources. 

The Broader Impact: Culture Wars and Censorship

One of the most controversial aspects of SB 17 is its broad definition of “material harmful to minors.” Critics fear that this vague language could be used to target age-appropriate LGBTQ+ or sex education content, reflecting a broader trend of censorship in Indiana. Already, there have been efforts to remove LGBTQ+ literature from schools and libraries under the guise of protecting minors. Organizations such as the Free Speech Coalition have raised concerns and attempted to combat similar regulation in other states because of this. 

This raises the question of whether the internet could become the next battleground in these ongoing culture wars. While parents already have tools to manage their children’s online activities, laws like SB 17 may infringe on the rights of all Hoosiers, not just minors.

Age Verification Methods 

ID-based Age Validation

Age verification based on Identity Documents (ID) follows a similar procedure to identity verification. In order to assure secure verification, the user must submit a picture of themselves and their identity document for comparison with biometric data. This approach is easy to use, takes less than 60 seconds, and has a zero fraud tolerance thanks to Ondato’s system.

Estimating Age

Conversely, age estimation technologies limit the requirement for identity documents by using biometric information to classify the person into an age category. Most people can be onboarded using Ondato without the need for extra documentation; identification is only needed if there are any questions.

The Path Forward

As Indiana moves forward with SB 17, the state is likely to face legal challenges similar to those seen in other states. While protecting minors from explicit content is a worthy goal, lawmakers must carefully consider the constitutional and privacy implications of such legislation. Parents already have tools at their disposal to safeguard their children online, and any new laws should enhance these protections without infringing on the rights of adults.

In the end, the debate over age verification laws like SB 17 underscores the need for a balanced approach—one that protects minors while respecting the constitutional rights of all internet users.

Published August 27, 2024

Words by Aiste Joksaite

Share article