9th Circuit Partially Revives California Law Protecting Kids' Online Data

Appeals court rejects judge's ruling that the law would improperly interfere with companies' use of the internet and violate their free speech.

Mar. 12, 2026 at 10:51pm

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A federal appeals court has revived parts of a groundbreaking California law that limits online businesses' collection and use of information from users under 18. The law, which would be the first of its kind in the nation if it takes effect, requires companies to report to the state on any product or service they offer online that is likely to be accessed by those under 18, and to provide plans to reduce any harm the youths might suffer. It also prohibits businesses from collecting most types of personal information about minors.

Why it matters

The ruling is a victory for California's efforts to protect children's online privacy, but the law still faces legal challenges. The appeals court left intact some key provisions blocked by a lower court judge, raising concerns about potential burdens on free speech and the media's ability to reach young audiences.

The details

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 3-0 to revive parts of the California law, rejecting a judge's previous decision to overturn the entire statute. The appeals court said the law could require online businesses to provide privacy protections for their users, either for those believed to be minors or for all users if a company has not determined which ones are likely younger than 18. However, the court left in place a ban on provisions of the law targeting 'dark patterns' - content designed to manipulate or undermine a user's decision-making.

  • The California Legislature passed the bill unanimously in 2022.
  • The law was scheduled to take effect in July 2024 before a federal judge blocked its implementation.
  • The 9th Circuit issued its ruling on March 12, 2026.

The players

NetChoice

An internet trade group whose members include Google, Amazon, Meta and TikTok.

Rob Bonta

California Attorney General, whose office defended the state law.

Buffy Wicks

California Assembly Member who authored the online privacy law.

Beth Labson Freeman

U.S. District Judge in Oakland who previously blocked the entire state law.

Reporters' Committee for Freedom of the Press

A nonprofit representing journalists that filed arguments on behalf of media organizations including Hearst Corp., the New York Times and Reuters.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“Let me be clear: our kids' safety cannot wait, and we won't let Tech Giants profit off our children.”

— Rob Bonta, California Attorney General (sfchronicle.com)

“This is a huge victory for free speech and essentially a death knell for California's online speech code.”

— Paul Taske, NetChoice attorney (sfchronicle.com)

“The ruling allows important parts of the law to move forward and affirms that protecting children online is a compelling priority.”

— Buffy Wicks, California Assembly Member (sfchronicle.com)

What’s next

The case will now return to U.S. District Judge Beth Labson Freeman, who must reexamine the law's provisions on 'dark patterns' under new Supreme Court standards.

The takeaway

This ruling is a partial victory for California's efforts to safeguard children's online privacy, but the law still faces legal challenges. While the appeals court allowed key provisions to move forward, it left intact some restrictions that could burden free speech and media access to young audiences, underscoring the complex balance between protecting kids and preserving digital rights.