Khara Boender: Protecting youth or infringing upon fundamental rights? Examining the First Amendment implications of HB 3

In an age where digital connectivity shapes the very fabric of our society, Florida’s newest social media legislation, HB 3, stands out for its significant restrictions on internet access — particularly for younger users. Gov. Ron DeSantis recently signed HB 3 into law, raising questions about preserving First Amendment rights in the digital sphere.

A significant provision of HB 3 would prohibit those younger than 14 from owning social media accounts and mandate the termination of accounts already created by users under 14. While we appreciate and share Florida lawmakers’ concern toward younger internet users, we question the effectiveness of this approach.

HB 3, though perhaps well-intentioned, poses challenges to the First Amendment rights guaranteed to all Americans, regardless of age. The legislation directly violates the right to free speech by encroaching on the rights of younger users’ ability to access information and participate in online conversations. Young people will be denied the opportunity to engage in the online exchange of ideas and stay informed about current events that shape the world in which they are growing up.

DeSantis recently rejected an earlier version of the legislation that included explicit age verification requirements for social media accounts. This measure could have compromised children’s privacy by collecting more data about them. While HB 3 does not include such explicit age verification, it still relies on social media platforms confirming its users’ ages to comply with the new age-specific requirements. This means that digital services would need to collect additional personal data on every user to confirm their age and store that additional data to prove compliance.

The bill does allow parents to regain some say by letting their children have social media accounts once they turn 14, but it still denies parents that authority before then. Regardless of the child’s age, we firmly support the authority of parents — not the state — in deciding what is best for their child. However, other First Amendment, data privacy, and equity concerns are associated with requiring social media platforms to acquire parent or legal guardian consent before allowing users to create and access accounts.

Social media serves as a vital source of support and community for many users, including children who may struggle to find friends with similar interests in their offline environments or those with medical challenges. These online communities often act as critical resources for individuals enduring challenging home situations, offering information to get help, solace and connection. Navigating the complexities of growing up can be excruciatingly difficult, and having supportive friends online can be invaluable for children facing obstacles beyond their control.

While Florida’s HB 3 aims to safeguard the well-being of young internet users, it — and similar bills in other states — will likely face legal challenges due to First Amendment concerns and the inability to operationalize at scale.

HB 3 restricts access to information or speech for Florida’s future leaders — an intrusion that must remain within the purview of parents, not the state.
___

Khara Boender is the state policy director at the Computer & Communications Industry Association.