As the Supreme Court prepares to tackle cases with far-reaching implications for America’s youth, a growing sense of disillusionment among younger generations underscores the court’s critical role in shaping the lives of teenagers. From TikTok bans to gender-affirming care and vaping regulations, the court’s docket reveals a focus on issues that, while ostensibly about national security and public health, profoundly affect teens’ everyday lives.
Teen Voices on TikTok and Trust in SCOTUS
Virginia high school junior Kailey Corum represents a demographic deeply intertwined with TikTok, a platform that 17% of teens report using “almost constantly.” Yet her trust in the Supreme Court to decide the platform’s fate is tepid.
“I don’t put, exactly, full faith into it,” Corum remarked outside the court after a school tour. Despite her concerns, she feels powerless to influence the outcome.
The court’s review of President Joe Biden’s bipartisan TikTok ban, set to take effect January 19, highlights a broader disconnect. While policymakers emphasize national security risks posed by TikTok’s Chinese ownership, teens like Corum see the app as a vital tool for news, entertainment, and self-expression.
“The court, I don’t think, is thinking of this in terms of children,” said Leslie Y. Garfield Tenzer, a social media law expert. Instead, the focus lies on concerns about foreign manipulation, leaving the voices of teens—the app’s primary users—secondary in the debate.
High-Stakes Cases Affecting Teens
The TikTok case is just one of several pivotal disputes with profound implications for America’s youth:
- Gender-Affirming Care: Earlier this month, the court heard arguments over a Tennessee law banning gender-affirming care for minors. The case centers on whether state lawmakers overstepped in limiting medical decisions for transgender teens. Justice Clarence Thomas framed the issue as an age classification rather than a sex-based discrimination case, raising concerns among advocates for transgender youth.
- Vaping Regulations: A pending case questions the Food and Drug Administration’s efforts to regulate vaping products, widely used by teens. The focus is less on the health risks for youth and more on whether the FDA followed proper procedures. In 2020, nearly 19% of high school students reported vaping, a figure that underscores the stakes for teen health.
- Online Age Verification: In January, the court will examine a Texas law requiring age verification for accessing adult content online. While opponents argue the law infringes on First Amendment rights, proponents frame it as essential for safeguarding minors.
Each case pits public policy goals—national security, public health, and child safety—against the rights and freedoms of individuals, with teens often caught in the middle.
Eroding Trust Among Gen Z
The Supreme Court’s decisions arrive at a time when trust in the institution among young Americans is at a historic low. A Marquette Law School poll revealed that only 44% of Americans aged 18-29 approve of the court’s performance, the lowest among all age groups.
“The court isn’t directly evaluating what it thinks will be best for young people,” said Aaron Tang, an education law professor at the University of California, Davis. Instead, the justices weigh whether state and federal agencies acted within their authority—a distinction that leaves some teens feeling unheard.
This sentiment resonates with Diana Thu-Thao Rhodes, vice president at Advocates for Youth, who says young people are frustrated by the lack of representation in decisions that directly impact them. “What we have heard from them is an increase in distrust and disillusionment with government institutions,” Rhodes explained.
A Call for Representation
For high school junior Spencer Rahim, the issues debated in court feel distant, even as he acknowledges their importance. He believes the justices should better connect with the concerns of ordinary citizens, especially young people.
“They need to listen to the people a little bit more,” Rahim said, summarizing a sentiment shared by many of his peers.
As the court prepares to rule on these consequential cases, its decisions will not only shape policy but also influence how the next generation views the nation’s highest judicial body—a body many feel must work harder to earn their trust.