In 2024, the Florida legislature enacted a new law that restricts social media access for minors, sparking widespread debate among parents, educators, tech companies, and legal professionals. The purpose of the legislation is to address growing concerns about the impact of online platforms on children’s mental health, privacy, and safety. While supporters view the law as a necessary step to protect young users from harmful content and predatory behavior, critics argue it raises constitutional questions and may place new burdens on businesses operating in the digital space.
At The Lomnitzer Firm P.A., our experienced cyber law attorneys are dedicated to helping you navigate these challenges. By leveraging both federal and state legal strategies, we work to defend your rights and take decisive action against those responsible for harmful online conduct, whether it affects you personally or professionally. As this new law reshapes the online landscape for minors, understanding its implications—and how it may affect families, schools, and businesses—is essential.
House Bill (HB) 3 went into effect on January 1, 2025, and was one of the most controversial proposals to emerge from the 2024 Florida legislative session. The impetus for the law was concerns about the addictiveness and harm to children’s mental health that social media usage can cause.
The law prohibits minors under 16 from having social media accounts, unless they are 14 or 15 years old and have parental consent. Affected platforms must terminate a minor’s account upon receiving notice from a minor’s parent. The law also requires age verification for individuals to access pornographic websites in Florida, but no party has challenged that aspect of the law.
Tech industry groups NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) immediately challenged HB 3, arguing that it violates their free speech rights under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Prominent members of NetChoice include Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, and Google. CCIA also represents tech giants such as Facebook, Instagram, Google, and Pinterest.
In June 2025, a federal district court judge issued a preliminary injunction blocking the state from enforcing the law, finding that it likely violated First Amendment rights of tech industry groups and their individual members. The judge previously had denied a request for a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of the law until the tech industry groups amended their complaint. Florida appealed the judge’s ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, seeking to enforce the law while the court case continues.
A divided three-judge panel of the Eleventh Circuit granted a request from the state to stay the injunction entered by the district court. Two of the three judges, both of whom President Donald Trump appointed, found that the Florida Attorney General had shown a “strong showing of a likelihood of success.” While litigation over the law’s constitutionality will continue, a majority of the appellate panel found the law to be content-neutral, in that it is designed to restrict minors’ access to certain online platforms rather than speech. The majority accepted the state’s argument that the law prohibits not the use of social media, but only apps that use addictive features, such as “personal interactive metrics” regarding “likes” or “shares,” and “live-streaming,” among others. As a result, the majority concluded that it was unlikely that HB 3 violated the First Amendment, and the compliance costs the tech industry groups might incur do not outweigh the state’s interest in enforcing HB 3.
Judge Robin Rosenbaum, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, issued a dissent that opposed the majority opinion, finding that the law is “plainly unconstitutional under the First Amendment.” Rosenbaum argued that the law is content-based because it excludes streaming services like Hulu and Disney+, but not social media platforms. Therefore, Rosenbaum reasoned, it is subject to the higher standard of strict scrutiny under the First Amendment rather than the intermediate scrutiny adopted by the majority. Furthermore, Rosenbaum found that the law affects users’ decisions about whether and how to speak online and interferes with platforms’ editorial choices regarding who can join the platform and what content they can access.
The court’s decision lifting the preliminary injunction means that Florida can begin enforcing the law right away. The Florida Attorney General praised the court’s decision, vowing that his office will aggressively enforce HB 3. Governor Ron DeSantis also lauded the win, claiming that the state puts parents and kids first.
In contrast, Paul Task of NetChoice expressed disappointment in the decision, stating that it would continue to challenge Florida’s “censorship regime” that violates its citizens’ free speech rights.
Enforcement of HB 3 could affect popular social media platforms, including Instagram, Snapchat, Facebook, and YouTube, due to some features they use, such as autoplay and infinite scroll. However, HB 3 does not list the platforms it will cover; it only lists the criteria for platforms to be subject to the law.
Furthermore, the law does not specify how online platforms should verify users’ ages or how the state will enforce it across multiple platforms, each with unique design features.
HB 3 gives parents new authority to request termination of their child’s social media accounts if the child is under 16. As a result, parents may need to monitor their child’s online activity more closely and be prepared to notify the platforms directly if they believe their child is violating the law.
Platforms must determine whether their features—such as autoplay, infinite scroll, or live-streaming—fall within the law’s restrictions. They also face uncertainty about how to implement effective age verification systems, since HB 3 does not specify uniform standards for compliance across platforms.
Florida’s HB 3 is one of the first state laws to impose broad restrictions on minors’ social media use. Depending on the outcome of ongoing litigation, other states may consider similar measures, potentially leading to a patchwork of regulations that social media companies and families will need to navigate.
Your online reputation and digital presence are among your most valuable assets, and they demand vigilant protection in today’s fast-changing environment. Florida’s new restrictions on social media for minors highlight how quickly laws can reshape the responsibilities of digital platforms and the rights of individuals. You may have powerful legal remedies to pursue against those who misuse your name, spread harmful content, or infringe on your rights.
At The Lomnitzer Firm P.A., our Delray Beach social media attorneys are committed to guiding you through these complexities, helping you understand your options, and taking decisive action to safeguard your personal and professional image. Contact us today at (800) 853-9692 or reach out online to begin building a legal strategy that secures your future.
