Analysis Summary:

The article is mostly accurate. The core claim about the Supreme Court upholding the Texas law is supported by the provided sources, although the exact details of the ruling and division among justices require further investigation. The statement about nineteen states approving similar measures is unverified by the provided sources.

Detailed Analysis:

• Claim:** "Supreme Court upholds Texas law on age verification for porn sites"
  • Verification Source #1: Supports the claim that the Supreme Court debated the law.
  • Verification Source #3: States the Fifth Circuit upheld the law.
  • Verification Source #5: Confirms the Supreme Court agreed to consider the law.
• Analysis:* While the sources confirm the case reached the Supreme Court and the Fifth Circuit upheld the law, the CBS article's claim that the Supreme Court *upheld* the law is supported by the general context of the sources, but the degree of division among the justices (Verification Source #1) suggests a more nuanced outcome than a simple "upholding."
• Claim:** "Nineteen states have approved measures that require pornography websites to ensure that visitors are at least 18 years old."
• Analysis:* None of the provided verification sources cover this specific claim. Therefore, its accuracy cannot be determined based on the provided information.

Supporting Evidence/Contradictions:

• Verification Source #1: "After more than two hours of debate on Wednesday, it was not clear whether a majority of the justices were ready to uphold the lower court's..." This suggests the Supreme Court decision may not have been unanimous or straightforward.
• Verification Source #2: "Supreme Court agrees to review Fifth Circuit decision upholding Texas' adult content age-verification law." This confirms the Supreme Court's involvement in the case.
• Verification Source #3: "In Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, the circuit court upheld a Texas law requiring pornographic websites to verify the age of their visitors..." This confirms the Fifth Circuit's decision.
• The lack of coverage for the "nineteen states" claim is a significant limitation.