AUSTIN — The Texas Longhorns have lost tons of talent to the NFL this offseason, but the team has reloaded through the transfer portal.

One of those transfer additions could soon prove to be the most impactful, especially when considering recent comments made by Texas coach Steve Sarkisian.

A Texas law requiring pornographic websites to verify the age of their users will remain after the Supreme Court declined an emergency appeal. 

Here’s what the court said about House Bill 1181 and what happens next. 

What is HB 1181?

HB 1181 passed in 2023, requiring porn sites to verify the age of users with a government-issued ID or reasonable alternative. The bill was written by Plano Republican state Rep. Matt Shaheen. The bill prevents minors from accessing sites and comes with a $10,000-a-day fine for violators and $250,000 “if a child is exposed to pornographic content due to not properly verifying a user’s age.”

Last March, in a court battle between the state and Aylo Global Entertainment — which owns many popular pornographic websites, including Pornhub — sides argued whether or not Texas’ law violated free speech rights. The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that HB 1181 does not violate the First Amendment. 

In addition to Texas, Pornhub has reluctantly blocked site access for people in other states with age-verification laws, including Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, North Carolina, Utah and Virginia.

Will HB 1181 remain?

For now. According to Newsweek, the Free Speech Coalition, a trade association that fights for protection and the rights of the adult industry, said they will continue to fight the current bill. 

“The ruling by the Fifth Circuit remains in direct opposition to decades of Supreme Court precedent, and we remain hopeful that the Supreme Court will grant our petition for certiorari and reaffirm its lengthy line of cases applying strict scrutiny to content-based restrictions on speech like those in the Texas statute we’ve challenged. We will continue to fight for the right to access the internet without intrusive government oversight,” a spokesperson for the Free Speech Coalition said. 

What other sites does Pornhub’s parent company Aylo own?

Owned by the adult entertainment conglomerate Aylo, Pornhub stands as the second-most visited website in its category, trailing only behind XVideos.

There are eight video-sharing websites in the Pornhub Network: GayTube, Peeperz, PornIQ, Pornhub, RedTube, Thumbzilla, Tube8, and YouPorn. The network also operates Porn MD, a video search engine that aggregates content from across the network.

All adult entertainment brands operated by Aylo include:

• Brazzers
• Digital Playground
• Men.com
• Mofos
• Nutaku
• Pornhub
• Reality Kings
• RedTube
• Sean Cody
• Twistys
• WhyNotBi.com
• Xtube
• YouPorn

— USA TODAY contributed to this report.

When Jumana Fakhreddine took part in last week’s anti-war protests at the University of Texas at Austin, she said organizers had set up a peaceful teach-in with speakers and pizza. Their purpose was to pressure the university’s leadership to divest in entities tied to the Israeli war effort in Gaza, she said.

But the moment instead devolved into chaos where dozens of students were arrested by riot-gear clad state and local police officers who used force to quell the demonstration and stop students from venting their frustrations.

“The whole reason we were there was just to simply ask for divestment and to stop supporting the ethnic cleansing and genocide of Palestinians,” Fakhreddine, a 21-year-old biology and pre-med student, said. “I think that we just all want the occupation to stop.”

The ongoing protests at UT Austin come in response to the Israeli-led effort against Hamas after the Oct. 7 attack that left more than 1,200 Israelis dead and dozens held captive. Since then, the Gaza Ministry of Health reports more than 34,000 Palestinians have been killed in the Israel-Hamas war.

What is divestment?

These protests aren’t confined to the UT Austin campus. Similar demonstrations have erupted on other public and private campuses across the state and the country. While reports and photos of a heavy-handed police response to the protests have dominated headlines, some students say the message about divestment hasn’t resonated as much as it should.

So what exactly is divestment, and why are protesters calling for it? It all starts with university endowments – basically, donated money and assets that are invested to generate income.

Caleb Silver, the editor-in-chief of Investopedia, told the Texas Newsroom that the UT System has one of the largest endowments in the world. As of the 2023 fiscal year, it was worth about $44.9 billion.

Silver said “divestment” is a broad term, but in terms of what protesters are demanding, it includes three key elements.

“What you see through these protests is students … asking for the university and their endowments to stop investing in companies that either do business directly with Israel, or do business with companies in Israel, or that invest in companies that are domiciled in Israel,” he said. “So, it’s a broad request for the UT [System] endowment or some of these campuses.”

Last Wednesday’s protest at UT Austin was organized by the Palestine Solidarity Committee in Austin, a student organization, and specifically “called for a cease-fire in Gaza and for UT to divest from weapons manufacturers that provide supplies to Israel,” reported KUT.

Some students have also said they don’t want their tuition to go toward funding what they call a genocide of Palestinians. That’s not too far-fetched, as Silver noted some university endowments are partially funded by tuition.

“Endowments, generally speaking, are built from tuition payments made by students. They’re also made from gifts from former students and alumni who are influential people connected to the university,” he said. “So oftentimes you will see wealthy donors giving millions – if not billions – of dollars to a university’s endowment.”

Calls for divestment aren’t a new strategy. They actually date back to at least the 1960s, when colleges and universities were in the grips of protests calling for an end to the war in Vietnam. Those were followed by calls for divestment in protest of South African apartheid and later, the fossil fuel industry in Texas.

That history aside, predicting the actual impact of divestment is somewhat complicated.

Chris Marsicano, an assistant professor of educational studies and public policy at Davidson College in North Carolina, told NPR the anti-fossil fuel movement didn’t make a significant difference. And it’s unclear whether the current campaign will yield results the protest movement deems significant.

“When universities have divested from fossil fuels, that hasn’t made much of a dent in terms of the stock prices of those fossil fuel companies, and it doesn’t seem to affect the university endowments,” he said. “It also has some parallels to South Africa in the ’80s. But even then, the research shows that most of the divestment efforts mainly led to a global political movement. And I don’t know that we’re there yet with divestment from Israel due to the Gaza conflict.”

The calls for divestment aren’t confined to the UT Austin campus. Students at the University of Texas at Dallas held sit-in demonstrations last week and eventually met with university president Richard Benson, KERA reported.

“Our demand is for divestment. Our demand is for our university to end its complicity in the genocide,” said Fatima Tulkarem, a member of Students for Justice in Palestine at UTD.

Demonstrators, however, didn’t make any headway toward their demands and said the meeting didn’t lead to meaningful discussions.

The flip side of divestment

Nationally, at least one student protest movement has provided some sense of progress. Brown University in Rhode Island announced Tuesday that an agreement was reached where protesters would dismantle their encampment and a university advisory committee would meet to discuss the students’ divestment demands.

“The University agreed that five students will be invited to meet with five members of the Corporation of Brown University in May to present their arguments  to divest Brown’s endowment from ‘companies enabling and profiting from the genocide in Gaza,’” the school said in a statement. Brown President Christina H. Paxson will also “ask the  Advisory Committee on University Resources Management to provide a recommendation on the matter of divestment by Sept. 30, and this will be brought to the Corporation for a vote at its October 2024 meeting.”

But Investopedia’s Caleb Silver said there is a flip side to divestment: If universities ultimately agree to divest from a certain company or entity – whether in Texas or elsewhere – they surrender any say in how it acts afterwards.

“You lose your voice in what that company is able to do going forward. And if you’re a large shareholder – like a lot of these big university endowments are – you have a pretty big voice in how these companies operate,” Silver said.

“Well, you’ve taken your money out, you’ve walked away, you’ve let your money do the walking. But you’ve lost your ability to affect strategy, to affect change within that company.”