Florida lawmakers have passed controversial legislation that would prohibit children under 16 from using certain social media platforms. The bill is now headed to Governor Ron DeSantis’ desk, awaiting his signature or veto.
The Florida House passed House Bill 1 on Thursday in a 108-7 vote. The Senate had passed the bill earlier that same day in a 23-14 vote. The bill, titled “Online Protections for Minors,” seeks to restrict social media access for minors in several key ways.
First, it would require certain social media companies operating in Florida to verify the age of account holders. Platforms would need to utilize age verification methods before allowing accounts to be created.
Second, the bill prohibits minors under age 16 from creating new accounts on covered platforms. Companies would be required to make reasonable efforts to terminate any accounts they know or believe to be held by children under 16.
The types of social media platforms that would fall under the bill’s requirements appear broad. They include sites that allow user-generated uploads, use algorithms to analyze user data, have features like push notifications and auto-play video, and have over 10% daily active users under 16 spending at least 2 hours per day on average.
Supporters argue the age restrictions are necessary to protect children’s mental health and privacy. They say heavy social media use can be addictive and expose minors to inappropriate content and predators.
“We’re talking about businesses that are using addictive features to engage in mass manipulation of our children to cause them harm,” said Senate bill sponsor Senator Erin Grall (R-Vero Beach).
Critics counter it’s government overreach into parental rights. They believe moms and dads should decide if their kids access social media, not lawmakers. Opponents also warn the bill likely violates First Amendment free speech protections.
“Parenting is very difficult, but that doesn’t mean that the government needs to step in,” said Senator Tina Polsky (D-Boca Raton), who voted against the bill.
Governor DeSantis has voiced concerns about preserving parental authority. He said parents should be able to opt-in if they want their children on social media.
“As much as I think its harmful to have people on these social media platforms for five or six hours a day, a parent can supervise a kid to use it more sparingly,” DeSantis noted.
The bill’s future remains uncertain even if signed into law. A federal judge recently blocked a similar social media age restriction in Ohio, saying it’s likely unconstitutional.
U.S. District Judge Algenon Marbley issued a preliminary injunction halting Ohio’s law before it took effect. That law required parental consent for kids under 16 to open social media accounts.
In his ruling, Marbley reiterated First Amendment concerns he raised when initially blocking the law’s enforcement. He said the First Amendment protects anonymous speech, including online.
Marbley also found the Ohio law’s broad limitations appeared to violate minors’ free speech rights. Parents already have options to monitor their children’s technology use, he added.
Legal experts say Florida’s proposed social media age restrictions could face similar constitutional challenges if enacted.
This will be overturned in a court of law, even by those judges appointed by Governor DeSantis and President Trump,” predicted Democratic State Senator Jason Pizzo, a former prosecutor.
Recent years have seen growing bipartisan concern over social media’s effects on youth mental health. Several states have explored banning or restricting access for minors.
But most legislation has stalled or been struck down due to the significant free speech hurdles involved. Some lawmakers have shifted focus toward strengthening parental oversight tools instead.
As Florida awaits DeSantis’ decision, other states are watching closely. The next phase in the debate over social media age limits is likely to play out in courtrooms across America.
Florida’s bill underscores the complex balancing act between protecting children and preserving online speech rights. How this controversy ultimately gets resolved could impact minors’ digital lives for years to come.
