U.S. Supreme Court Allows Texas to Enforce App Store Age Verification Law
美國最高法院准許德州執行 App Store 年齡驗證法
Introduction
The United States Supreme Court has decided not to stop the implementation of a Texas law that requires age verification and parental permission for downloading and buying mobile applications.
美國最高法院已決定不阻止德州法律的實施，該法律要求在下載與購買行動應用程式時必須經過年齡驗證並取得家長許可。
Main Body
The App Store Accountability Act, passed in 2025, requires app store operators and developers to check the age of users. Furthermore, accounts for people under 18 must be linked to a parent or guardian's account, and parents must give their approval after being notified of an app's age rating. This law follows a similar trend in other U.S. states, such as Alabama and Utah, as well as international moves like Australia's 2025 ban on social media for children under 16.
2025年通過的《App Store 問責法》要求 App Store 營運商與開發者檢查使用者的年齡。此外，18 歲以下人士的帳號必須與家長或監護人的帳號綁定，且家長在收到應用程式的分級通知後必須給予同意。這項法律延續了美國其他州（如阿拉巴馬州與猶他州）的趨勢，以及像是澳洲 2025 年禁止 16 歲以下兒童使用社群媒體等國際舉措。
However, several groups, including the Computer & Communications Industry Association, have challenged the law in court. They assert that the mandate violates First Amendment rights to free speech because it forces private companies to control access to educational and news content. On the other hand, Attorney General Ken Paxton emphasized that the state has a strong reason to protect children from 'dangerous modern products' and the illegal sale of minors' data.
然而，包括電腦與通訊工業協會（CCIA）在內的數個團體已在法院對該法提出挑戰。他們主張此項強制規定違反了第一修正案的言論自由權，因為它強迫私人公司管控對教育與新聞內容的存取。另一方面，總檢察長 Ken Paxton 強調，州政府有充分理由保護兒童免受「危險的現代產品」及非法銷售未成年人數據的影響。
Different courts have had different views on the law. A district court originally blocked the law, comparing it to requiring bookstores to check the ID of every customer. Consequently, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned that decision, arguing that parental consent is more important. The Supreme Court's recent refusal to step in means the law can be used while the legal battle continues in lower courts.
不同法院對該法持有不同看法。地方法院最初阻止了該法的實施，將其比作要求書店檢查每位顧客的身分證。隨後，美國第五巡迴上訴法院推翻了該決定，認為家長同意權更為重要。最高法院最近拒絕介入，意味著在下級法院繼續進行法律訴訟期間，該法可以繼續執行。
Conclusion
The Texas law will remain in effect while the constitutional challenges continue to be debated in the court system.
在法院系統繼續辯論憲法挑戰之際，德州的這項法律將維持生效。
Vocabulary Learning
🚀 The 'Logic Bridge': Moving from A2 to B2
At the A2 level, you usually connect ideas with simple words like and, but, or because. To reach B2, you need Connectors of Contrast and Result. These words act like road signs, telling the reader exactly how your ideas relate.
⚡ The Power Shift: From 'But' to 'However'
In the text, we see a shift from a law being passed to people fighting it. Instead of saying "But some groups don't like it," the text uses:
"However, several groups... have challenged the law."
B2 Tip: Use However at the start of a sentence followed by a comma to create a formal, sophisticated pause. It signals a total change in direction.
⚖️ Balancing Two Sides: 'On the other hand'
When you have two opposing arguments (like a debate), don't just list them. Use this phrase to create a "scale":
- Side A: Companies say it violates free speech.
- Side B: *"On the other hand, Attorney General Ken Paxton emphasized..."
🚩 The Domino Effect: 'Consequently'
A2 students often use 'so'. B2 students use 'Consequently' to show a professional cause-and-effect relationship.
- A2 style: The court didn't like the law, so the next court changed the decision.
- B2 style: The district court blocked the law. Consequently, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned that decision.
Quick Reference Guide for your writing:
| A2 Word (Simple) | B2 Upgrade (Sophisticated) | Function |
|---|---|---|
| But | However | Contrast |
| Also | Furthermore | Adding info |
| So | Consequently | Result |
| But (opposite) | On the other hand | Comparing two views |