TALLAHASSEE, Florida — A federal court has blocked state officials from executing a Florida legislation that would prohibit young children from having social media accounts while a legal challenge to the law is pending. U.S. District Judge Mark Walker issued the injunction on Tuesday, preventing provisions of the law from taking effect.
When Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the act into law in 2024, it was one of the most draconian limits on children’s use of social media in the United States. The bill would prohibit youngsters under the age of 14 from creating social media accounts and would require parental permission for 14 and 15-year-olds to use them.
Walker noted in his decision granting the preliminary injunction sought by the Computer and Communications Industry Association and NetChoice that the law is “likely unconstitutional,” but acknowledged that parents and lawmakers have “sincere concerns” about the effects of social media on children.
Walker argued that social media sites’ limitation on allowing particular age groups to create accounts “directly burdens those youths’ rights to engage in and access speech.”
Also on Tuesday, a federal judge in Atlanta heard arguments from NetChoice attempting to prohibit a 2024 Georgia law that would mandate age verification for social media accounts and compel minors under the age of 16 to obtain parental permission to use accounts. Like in Florida and other states where legislation have been blocked, the internet trade group NetChoice claims that the Georgia bill violates free speech rights, is unclear, and too burdensome.
While agreeing with business organizations’ claims that the law restricts free speech, Walker permitted a part of the Florida law to take effect, requiring platforms to remove accounts for minors under 16 if their parent or guardian requests it.
Parents, and even some teenagers, are becoming increasingly concerned about the consequences of social media use on young people. Supporters of the legislation argue that they are necessary to help control young people’s explosive use of social media, which has been linked to an increase in despair and anxiety, according to researchers.
Matt Schruers, president and CEO of the CCIA, commended the judge’s decision to prohibit the Florida statute.
“This ruling vindicates our argument that Florida’s statute violates the First Amendment by blocking and restricting minors — and likely adults as well — from using certain websites to view lawful content,” according to a statement from him. “We look forward to seeing this statute permanently blocked as a violation of Floridians’ constitutional right to engage in lawful speech online.”
A representative for Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier defended the law and the state’s efforts to protect children from social media at a time when platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, and Snapchat appear nearly impossible to avoid.
“Florida parents voted through their elected representatives for legislation to safeguard children from the detrimental and often tragic consequences of social media. “These platforms do not have a constitutional right to addict children to their products,” Uthmeier’s press secretary, Jae Williams, stated. “We disagree with the court’s order and will immediately seek relief in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.”
In Atlanta, NetChoice attorney Jeremy Maltz told U.S. District Judge Amy Totenberg that Georgia’s law would impermissibly restrict speech by minors, saying that “before you share your art, before you share your political information, you need to produce your papers, please.”
Totenberg did not rule on Tuesday. However, noting verdicts against similar legislation in other states, she questioned Georgia’s case, asking Deputy Attorney General Logan Winkles, “What makes today different from all other days?”
Winkles argued the law’s requirement of “commercially reasonable” attempts to verify age could be quite cheap and likened it to banning minors from bars serving alcohol, not restricting their speech.