Report from MediaPost
In Brief – Federal District Judge Mark Walker has blocked enforcement of Florida law HB 3 that prohibits social media platforms that have so-called “addictive features”, such as showing “like” counts and automatically playing videos, from allowing anyone under age 14 to have an account and requires 14- and 15-year-olds to obtain parental consent to have an account. In his order, Walker cited numerous court precedents backing his statement that “Youth have First Amendment rights,” and ruled that “the law’s restrictions are an extraordinarily blunt instrument for furthering” the state’s interests in protecting young people and therefore it likely violates teens’ free speech rights. Although Walker dismissed the original challenge brought by tech trade groups NetChoice and CCIA, ruling they lacked “standing”, the groups amended and refiled their suit, arguing that social media platform Snap, one of their member companies, was likely covered by the law. In April, Florida’s Attorney General sued Snap for violating provisions of the law and the case was transferred to Walker’s federal court. The state has asked the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals to stay Walker’s preliminary injunction while the case proceeds.
Context – The rash of state laws regulating social media platforms on the premise that they are harmful to teens have largely been blocked by federal judges, generally for violating the First Amendment. Recent examples include laws in Ohio, Utah, Arkansas, and California. Given that they all operationally depend on age verification, the Supreme Court’s consideration of constitutional challenges to a Texas state law requiring age checks for viewing online pornography will help further inform the judges dealing with ongoing legislation. If the courtroom journeys of Florida’s law regulating social media content moderation is a guide, being four years in after trip to the US Supreme Court, only to be back in District Court, a prompt resolution is not likely. On the other hand, a flood of civil lawsuits targeting the same big social media platforms for allegedly harming teens using the same practice targeted by the state laws are having much better luck getting past initial court hurdles.