Political Attacks

KYIV, Ukraine — Ukraine’s parliament is taking another look at legislation that would remove criminal penalties for the creation and distribution of pornography, an activity that currently can carry a prison sentence of three to five years.

In May, the Verkhovna Rada rejected a similar measure, Draft Law No. 12191, titled “On Amendments to the Criminal Code of Ukraine to Improve Certain Provisions on Criminal Offenses Against Public Order and Morality.” That proposal had been under consideration since November 2024.

People’s Deputy Yaroslav Zheleznyak introduced both measures. He submitted the newer proposal, Draft Law No. 15294, in March, before lawmakers had voted down the earlier bill.

The latest bill, like its predecessor, would revise Ukraine’s existing restrictions on pornography. The proposed Draft Law on Amendments to the Criminal Code of Ukraine to Strengthen Liability for the Production and Distribution of Child Pornography would establish or increase penalties for child sexual abuse material, content produced without participants’ consent and the distribution of such material to minors. Consensual sexual material involving adults and distributed to adults would no longer be prohibited.

A Wall Street Journal report published Saturday described the initiative as a potential source of additional funding for Ukraine as the war with Russia continues. The renewed effort also comes as Ukrainian authorities have increased enforcement of tax laws involving content creators and following a scandal in which members of Ukraine’s press police were accused of taking bribes in exchange for ignoring pornography production and distribution.

The earlier proposal received 207 votes, falling short of the 226 needed for passage. The new bill has attracted greater support so far, receiving 231 votes in its first roll-call vote.

If the legislation clears its remaining readings, it will go to President Volodymyr Zelensky for his signature. Last year, after an OnlyFans model submitted a petition calling for decriminalization, Zelensky did not disclose his position on the issue. He said he would allow the legislative process to proceed before taking a position.

LONDON — U.K. media regulator Ofcom has fined adult website XGroovy £700,000 (about $986,000) for failing to comply with provisions of the Online Safety Act.

Ofcom opened its investigation into XGroovy in September 2025. In June, the regulator issued a provisional decision, saying it had “reasonable grounds” to believe the site had breached its obligations under the OSA between July and November 2025.

Ofcom has now finalized the decision, imposing a £700,000 fine on XGroovy for failing to have age checks in place. The regulator also fined the site £30,000 for failing to respond within the required timeframe to a legally binding request for information.

The regulator also plans to impose an additional penalty of £200 per day until XGroovy supplies the requested information or until November 3, 2026, whichever comes first.

Ofcom said that after it began formal enforcement proceedings against XGroovy, the site introduced age assurance measures and subsequently blocked access from U.K. IP addresses. The site is therefore no longer directly available to users in the country.

Ofcom Director of Enforcement George Lusty said, “The message to adult websites is clear: put effective age checks in place to keep children from accessing porn. If companies fail to do this, or ignore legally binding requests from us, they should expect to face fines.”

In February, French media regulator Arcom also sent enforcement notices to the operators of XGroovy, saying the site had not implemented age verification measures required under France’s Security and Regulation of the Digital Space (SREN) law.

Ofcom also issued a provisional notice of contravention Thursday to ZD Media, which the regulator identifies as the operator of hello.porn, homo.xxx, max.porn, ok.porn, ok.xxx, perfectgirls.xxx, pin.porn, pornhat.com, pornhat.one and pornstars.tube. Updating an investigation launched in September 2025, Ofcom said it has “reasonable grounds” to believe the company is in breach of its obligations under the OSA. ZD Media will have 20 working days to respond before Ofcom makes a final decision.

CANBERRA, Australia—Australia’s federal government is considering a ban on pornography that depicts strangulation or choking, putting the issue before Parliament as officials examine whether existing online safety measures go far enough. Tanya Plibersek, a Labor MP and social services minister in Prime Minister Anthony Albanese’s government, announced the proposal over the weekend, with other senior political figures confirming that the issue is under consideration.

“There is something wrong with a situation where 60 percent of young people say they’ve experienced strangulation,” Plibersek said on the Insiders program. She said the government was taking the proposal “very seriously.”

“This is not sex education. It’s not real life,” Plibersek said. A spokesperson for Prime Minister Albanese’s office said, “The Albanese Government is deeply concerned about young people being exposed to sexual strangulation and other harmful behaviours through online content such as pornography.

“That’s why our world-leading online safety laws include strong protections to prevent children from being exposed to age-inappropriate content,” the spokesperson added, referring to industry codes enforced by Australia’s eSafety Commissioner that regulate adult entertainment websites operating in the country.

Other reports indicate that Australian Attorney-General Michelle Rowland is working with Plibersek and senior Labor and Liberal MPs on legislation that could prohibit the depictions and make the conduct a criminal offense.

Pressure for a ban increased following the recent death of a teenage girl in Sydney. New South Wales Police believe she died as a result of a “suspected sexual choking act.” She was found unresponsive when medical first responders arrived and died several days later at a hospital in a Sydney suburb.

Australia’s proposal has drawn inspiration from the United Kingdom, where Parliament adopted amendments to a broad Crime and Policing Bill that prohibited depictions of strangulation in online pornography, including material involving consenting adults.

SALT LAKE CITY — A disputed provision of Utah’s age verification law that could make adult websites liable when minors use geolocation workarounds to evade the state’s requirements will remain on hold for now, extending a pause that began before the measure was scheduled to take effect in May.

Pornhub parent company Aylo filed a complaint in April with the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division, seeking to block the “deemed-location” provision of SB 73, which was signed into law in March. The renewed “period of forbearance” technically applies only to websites operated by Aylo. Industry attorney Corey Silverstein, however, said it would be impractical for Utah to enforce the provision against other websites or companies before the court rules on the pending motion for a preliminary injunction. Silverstein cautioned that companies should consult their own legal counsel because they could still face enforcement actions.

The law’s “deemed location” provision states: “An individual is considered to be accessing the website from this state if the individual is actually located in the state, regardless of whether the individual is using a virtual private network, proxy server, or other means to disguise or misrepresent the individual’s geographic location to make it appear that the individual is accessing a website from a location outside this state.”

In its complaint, Aylo argued that the law’s deemed-location and VPN provisions could expose adult entertainment companies to civil penalties and possible criminal liability unless they apply Utah’s age verification requirements “for every user of their platforms, anywhere in the world.” Aylo maintains that this would amount to “impermissible extraterritorial legislation” because Utah is “projecting its policy choices onto conduct occurring entirely outside its borders, in states and countries that have made different legislative judgments.”

The complaint further argued that the law violates the dormant Commerce Clause and Foreign Commerce Clause by “imposing significant burdens on, and purporting to regulate, the national and international markets for adult entertainment.”

In May, Aylo and the Utah Division of Consumer Protection reached an agreement establishing a period of forbearance during which the VPN provisions would not be enforced against Aylo through Sept. 3. The agreement also allowed for a longer pause if the court needed additional time to reach a decision.

The situation shifted again earlier this month when the Utah Division of Consumer Protection proposed a rule for implementing SB 73. Among its provisions are standards for determining what constitutes an acceptable approach to dealing with “geolocation obfuscation.” The proposed rule is scheduled to take effect Oct. 8.

Following that development, the parties agreed Thursday to extend the period of forbearance through Oct. 22, two weeks after the proposed rule is scheduled to take effect. The pause could end sooner if the court rules on Aylo’s pending motion for a preliminary injunction.

The parties’ joint stipulation states: “Although Plaintiffs believe that the proposed rule is fundamentally flawed and does not eliminate their claims or the need for relief, this Period of Continued Forbearance allows Plaintiffs to participate in that rulemaking process without the threat of liability in the interim. Additionally, this Period of Continued Forbearance provides the Court with additional time to resolve the current motion for a preliminary injunction, including the discretion to await the outcome of the rulemaking before deciding the motion.”

Utah’s VPN provision comes amid broader concern over the use of tools that can conceal a user’s location and allow age verification requirements to be circumvented. The issue has prompted efforts at both the state and federal levels to address what lawmakers view as a practical gap in enforcement.

The Utah Division of Consumer Protection will accept public comments on the proposed rule through Oct. 1.

WASHINGTON — A newly introduced bill in Congress could limit the ability of U.S. courts to enforce foreign laws that restrict speech protected by the First Amendment, a proposal that could potentially extend to some foreign age verification requirements.

Republican Rep. Michael Rulli of Ohio introduced the Guaranteeing Rights Against Novel International Tyranny and Extortion (GRANITE) Act on Thursday. The legislation would prevent U.S. courts from recognizing or enforcing “a foreign judgment, or a fine, order, or demand issued by a foreign court or a foreign state, enforcing a foreign censorship law.”

Under the bill, a “foreign censorship law” is defined as any foreign law that “has the primary purpose or substantial effect of restricting or penalizing expression, expressive conduct, or expressive association; targets expression, expressive conduct, or expressive association based on its content, viewpoint, or speaker identity; or compels disclosure that would reasonably chill that expression, expressive conduct, or expressive association; and would conflict with the protections of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution if recognized in the United States.”

That definition could raise questions about whether age verification requirements, including provisions contained in the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA) and the United Kingdom’s Online Safety Act (OSA), might qualify as foreign censorship laws. If they do, the GRANITE Act could potentially prevent U.S. courts from assisting with enforcement actions against American adult websites, including efforts to collect foreign fines. Governments abroad would still retain the ability to take action within their own jurisdictions, such as blocking access to U.S.-based websites.

Free-speech advocates have argued that age verification requirements can restrict expression based on content and potentially chill lawful speech, two considerations that could factor into whether such measures are classified as censorship under the GRANITE Act. The legislation was conceived by attorney Preston Byrne, who has represented online forum 4chan in its dispute with U.K. media regulator Ofcom over efforts to require the platform to implement age verification measures intended to prevent minors from accessing pornography.

The Supreme Court, however, addressed the First Amendment implications of age verification in its decision in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton. The court declared that “the First Amendment leaves undisturbed States’ traditional power to prevent minors from accessing speech that is obscene from their perspective. That power includes the power to require proof of age before an individual can access such speech. It follows that no person — adult or child — has a First Amendment right to access such speech without first submitting proof of age.” The court upheld the constitutionality of state age verification laws when they only “incidentally” burden adults’ protected speech. That ruling suggests foreign age verification laws meeting the same standard might not qualify as “foreign censorship” under the GRANITE Act.

Industry attorney Lawrence Walters said that if the GRANITE Act becomes law, U.S. companies facing foreign judgments stemming from alleged violations of age verification requirements could argue that the underlying laws meet the legislation’s definition of foreign censorship.

“It would be up to a reviewing court whether the Supreme Court’s decision in Paxton precludes these arguments,” Walters explained. “Each foreign law would need to be independently evaluated against the holding of Paxton. Some foreign laws go far beyond sexual expression when defining ‘harmful content.’ Therefore, the Paxton reasoning may not apply to some of these laws, thereby potentially shielding U.S. operators from foreign judgments.”

Industry attorney Corey D. Silverstein also said the GRANITE Act could give U.S.-based companies a significant defense against domestic enforcement of certain foreign online age verification laws if those requirements meet the bill’s definition of censorship, “particularly when their application depends on the content being accessed or when they require users to disclose identifying information as a condition of accessing protected speech.”

“The analysis would ultimately depend on the precise coverage, verification methods, privacy protections and enforcement mechanisms of the particular foreign law,” Silverstein said. “The more difficult requirement is that recognition of the foreign law must conflict with the First Amendment.

“In Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, the Supreme Court held that Texas’ requirement for age verification on websites substantially devoted to sexual material harmful to minors imposed only an incidental burden on adults’ protected speech,” Silverstein elaborated. “Accordingly, if a foreign AV law is directed specifically at minors’ access to material that is obscene as to minors, allows adults access after reasonable age verification, and is adequately tailored, then Paxton would support an argument that recognizing the law would not conflict with the First Amendment. In that circumstance, the law might fall outside GRANITE’s definition.”

Rulli is not alone among elected officials in supporting federal legislation addressing the enforcement of foreign speech restrictions. Republican Sen. Eric Schmitt of Missouri said last year that he planned to introduce similar legislation. Wyoming lawmakers also considered a state version of the GRANITE Act earlier this year. The measure cleared the state House but did not advance in the state Senate.

Trump administration officials have repeatedly described European content regulations as threats to free speech. The administration has also imposed visa restrictions on EU figures it views as leading “efforts to coerce American platforms to censor, demonetize, and suppress American viewpoints they oppose.” Those actions could signal administration support for the GRANITE Act if the legislation advances through Congress.

The GRANITE Act has been referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

TALLAHASSEE, Fla.—Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said his administration has implemented what it describes as “first-in-the-nation restrictions” barring recipients from using state-administered Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) funds to purchase luxury and non-essential goods, including pornography.

Florida distributes federal TANF assistance and other funding through its Temporary Cash Assistance (TCA) program. Qualifying residents receive benefits through EBT cards designed to help eligible families pay for basic and continuing needs, including food, clothing, rent, certain household supplies and personal care items.

“Taxpayer-funded assistance should help families put food on the table, keep the lights on, purchase clothing, provide for their children and overcome barriers on the path toward independence,” the governor said.

The restrictions apply to what DeSantis’ office categorized as “inappropriate, luxury and non-essential items.” Along with pornography, prohibited purchases include gambling, video games, tobacco and nicotine products, entertainment subscriptions, other drugs, intoxicants, alcohol, fortune-telling sessions and psychic services.

“Under Gov. DeSantis’ leadership, Florida continues to ensure government assistance serves as a bridge to greater stability and independence while safeguarding taxpayer resources,” said Kate Williams, the Florida interim secretary of the Department of Children and Families.

WASHINGTON — U.S. Sen. James Lankford, R-Okla., sent a letter Friday to Montreal-based Aylo and its ownership group, Ottawa private equity firm Ethical Capital Partners, responding to correspondence the company sent last week to state and federal officials. Aylo’s letter went to lawmakers and officials across 25 states where site-based age verification laws are currently in effect.

Aylo’s original letter outlined its support for age verification while arguing that verification should take place through operating systems or mobile device settings. The company has opposed the site-by-site and state-by-state approach now used across much of the United States, as well as in countries including France and Spain.

In a sharply worded two-page letter addressed to Ethical Capital Partners Vice President of Compliance Solomon Friedman, a Canadian criminal defense attorney and academic, Lankford accused Aylo of having “no interest in protecting children.”

Lankford writes, “Pornhub’s letter suggests that tech companies should be responsible for protecting children from pornography. Lawmakers can and should hold tech companies accountable for the harm they pose to children. But that should not preclude state and federal lawmakers from holding platforms like Pornhub accountable for the harm it causes.

“Pornhub’s letter fails to say the quiet part out loud: Pornhub would lose customers if children were prohibited from viewing its content,” Lankford asserts.

Aylo disputed Lankford’s characterization in response, with a spokesperson calling the senator’s claims factually inaccurate.

“Senator Lankford and Pornhub completely agree—effective age verification needs to be in place to prevent children from accessing age-inappropriate content on the internet,” the spokesperson said in a statement. The same statement was provided earlier Friday to Fox News Digital, which was the first news organization to receive Lankford’s letter from his office.

“Unfortunately, the way the Senator proposes has been proven to be ineffective everywhere it’s been attempted, including in Oklahoma,” the spokesperson added. The statement referred to the effects of Oklahoma’s age verification law, under which Aylo has restricted access to its websites for most users in the state, although the sites can still be reached through virtual private networks, or VPNs.

“Our site is one of [the] few that is currently complying with the law in Oklahoma, meaning the real risk to Oklahoma citizens of all ages lies on the hundreds of thousands of unregulated sites that remain accessible and are seeing increased traffic,” explained the Aylo spokesperson.

“We are the only free site that requires verification from uploaders as well as proof of consent from all depicted in content on our platform,” the spokesperson added. “The safety of our community is our top priority—this includes a zero-tolerance policy with respect to minors on our platform. We look forward to further addressing the Senator’s concerns in our reply to him.”

Aylo has not said whether its planned response to Lankford will be released publicly. The Free Speech Coalition, an adult industry trade organization, also disputed Lankford’s characterization of Aylo as deliberately targeting minors through marketing and sexually explicit material.

“No legitimate adult company is targeting minors,” stated Alison Boden, executive director of the FSC. “Aside from the multitude of moral and ethical issues, minor access is a financial and resource drain on adult businesses. Minor access drives up server and support costs, corrupts data, and provides no business value—minors are not consumers.”

She added, “Adult sites have been trying to block minors for over 20 years, developing protocols and systems, like the Restricted to Adults label, to make it easy for filters and devices to block our sites. We have every reason not to want minors on our platforms, and no reason to target them.”

The Restricted to Adults (RTA) label was developed and is managed by the Association of Sites Advocating Child Protection (ASACP). The organization also operates a privately funded reporting line for suspected child sexual exploitation and child sexual abuse material.

Aylo uses the RTA label across its websites and submits reports to the CyberTipline program operated by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.