From Free Speech Coalition, Inc. v. Rokita, decided Friday by Judges Frank Easterbrook and Amy St. Eve:
Indiana seeks a stay of the preliminary injunction that a district court entered preventing the enforcement of Ind. Code § 24-4-23, which requires web sites to limit minors' access to certain sexual materials.
Indiana's statute is functionally identical to one adopted by Texas. That statute has been held to be valid [by the Fifth Circuit, though the Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case]. Free Speech Coalition, Inc., which is a plaintiff in both the Indiana case and the Texas case, asked the Supreme Court to prevent enforcement of the Texas statute while that litigation continued. That application was denied, so the Texas statute is now in force.
We do not see any adequate reason why Texas's law may be enforced pending the [Supreme Court's] decision on the merits in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, while Indiana's may not be enforced. Functionally identical statutes should be treated the same while the Supreme Court considers the matter. Accordingly, Indiana's request for a stay is granted. The stay will remain in effect until the Supreme Court has issued its mandate in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton.
Briefing in this appeal will be deferred until the Supreme Court has decided Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton.…
But Judge Ilana Rovner concurred in part (as to deferring briefing) and dissented in part (as to the stay of the trial court injunction):
