TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) — A federal judge is weighing whether to block a Florida law from going into effect that would ban social media accounts for children under 14 and require parental permission for 14- and 15-year-olds.
The measure was one of the most restrictive bans on kids’ social media use in the country when Gov. Ron DeSantis signed it into law in 2024. Industry groups representing communications companies argue it unconstitutionally limits free speech.
U.S. District Judge Mark Walker heard oral arguments Friday in the case brought by the trade groups Computer & Communications Industry Association and NetChoice, which are seeking a preliminary injunction to prevent parts of the law from being enforced while the legal challenge plays out.
Supporters of the law have said it’s needed to help curb the explosive use of social media among young people, and what researchers say is an associated increase in depression and anxiety.
“We’re not opening a Pandora’s box, we’re closing one,” said Republican Rep. Tyler Sirois, who sponsored the bill. “The harm that it is causing our children is documented, and it is severe.”
At Friday’s hearing in Tallahassee, Walker pressed Kevin Golembiewski, an attorney for the state, to explain how the law doesn’t restrict users’ rights to free expression. Walker, who was appointed by former President Barack Obama, has often skewered the DeSantis administration’s proposals in characteristically colorful opinions.
“You’ve got a hard row to hoe,” Walker told the state’s attorney, “to convince me this doesn’t implicate speech.”
Supporters in Florida have been hopeful the bill will withstand legal challenges, arguing it restricts access to social media formats based on addictive features such as notification alerts and auto-play videos, rather than on their content.
“The aim of the law is to address compulsive use,” Golembiewski said. “It is not to address content,” adding that kids can spend as much time on apps as they want — if companies don’t use the addictive features outlined in the law.
An attorney for CCIA and NetChoice, whose members include Google, Meta, X and YouTube, called the state’s approach “draconian” and argued features like infinite scrolling can’t be divorced from the content they deliver.
“They are imposing a restriction on the ability to access expressive activity,” attorney Erin Murphy said. “That plainly implicates the First Amendment.”
Stephanie Joyce, the director of CCIA’s Litigation Center, says the law creates “significant barriers” to accessing online information that every American has a right to see — even children.
“This ‘internet rationing’ law blocks access to lawful content and is another example of the state’s unlawful attempt to police free speech,” Joyce said in a written statement.
The state hasn’t been enforcing the bill, which was slated to go into effect Jan. 1, while the lawsuit is pending.
Walker has said he’ll take time to review the parties’ arguments and will issue a ruling as soon as he can.
___ Kate Payne is a corps member for The Associated Press/Report for America Statehouse News Initiative. Report for America is a nonprofit national service program that places journalists in local newsrooms to report on undercovered issues.
