This week, the Supreme Court is hearing a porn case that focuses on safeguarding children, as stated by Republican AG.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is striving to maintain a Texas law that he believes is safeguarding children from harmful pornographic content.

The law, which was passed in 2023 and signed into law by Texas Governor Greg Abbott, mandates that porn sites verify users' ages through official documentation such as a driver's license or government-issued I.D. Failure to comply with this age verification requirement can result in fines.

The Free Speech Coalition, a group of porn sites, claims that the Texas law restricts their First Amendment rights and imposes an excessive burden on Texas adults in accessing their content.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the law, leading Pornhub to disable access to their website for all users in Texas.

This Wednesday, the two sides confronted each other before the Supreme Court to present their arguments.

The nation's highest court concurred with Paxton's argument that states have a stake in limiting children's exposure to pornographic content. Nonetheless, some justices expressed reservations about the Texas law's restrictions, fearing they may infringe on other forms of free speech expression.

The question before the court is whether the Texas law should be subject to "rational basis" or "strict scrutiny" review, with the latter requiring Texas to meet the strictest standards to uphold the age verification requirement.

The ruling of the court will likely affect not only the Texas law but also the over a dozen other porn site age verification laws in various states across the country.

After the hearing, Paxton expressed confidence that the Supreme Court would rule in Texas' favor, as stated in an interview with Planet Chronicle Digital.

"I am optimistic about the outcome of the case, as I believe most of the justices will rule in our favor based on the questions and comments I heard."

"He continued, "Even though the other side acknowledged our interest in protecting minors, they argued that our approach was an overburden on adults. They proposed alternative solutions, but those suggestions were ineffective, and they likely offered them up to avoid age verification, which would negatively impact their profits.""

Paxton acknowledged that while he is a strong advocate for free speech, there are certain limitations necessary to protect children. He pointed out that children are not allowed to sign contracts, get married, be served alcohol, or get tobacco, and these restrictions have been in place throughout history to safeguard their well-being.

"Children are protected in the developed world and elsewhere," he stated. "As a law enforcement officer, it is my duty to uphold Texas law and ensure the safety of our children. In this specific instance, I am confident in my ability to shield them from being exposed to this content."