1. United States
2. Letter

To whom it may concern: I keep writing in defense of strict scrutiny being applied to age verification laws because soon as it's overturned, other groups or governments in blue states can easily declare speech they dislike as obscene with no value. Imagine someone protesting abortion on their page on social media being banned, arrested, or fined because someone who supports abortion finds this kind of speech to be obscene. This can easily go both ways unless strict scrutiny and the Miller test are upheld with extreme prejudice against Texas' age verification law. Though pornography may be obscene for some, that doesn't disqualify it from First amendment protections. Secondly, who is going to define obscenity? Antiporn groups will definitely attempt to, along with anti-hate groups. You would open the door to an obscenity redefinition free-for-all where your power is weakened and you can't do much about it except to restore precedent that has worked for years. Thirdly, you would set yourself up for speculation that the court is not impartial or fair, but discriminatory and nationalist.