A Florida bill banning the use of social media by minors was approved Thursday by the state House and Senate, sending it to the governor’s desk.
The bill, known as HB 1, would prohibit anyone under 16 from creating new social media accounts and terminate existing accounts for those under 16. This bill stands out among similar bills introduced around the country in that it does not allow for exemptions with parental permission. It passed the House with bipartisan support in January.
HB 1, with some amendments, passed the Senate on a 23-14 vote Thursday morning, with five Republicans voting majority against the bill and two Democrats voting yes.
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis said the changes, which aim to clarify how the law defines social media and make the age verification process more private, don’t go far enough. In any event, the House voted again to approve the amendment later that day, sending it to the Governor’s deck.
“Parents need to play a role in this as well,” DeSantis said during a Thursday afternoon press conference. “I think parents are concerned about social media and what’s going on there and think that’s the problem. But I also think that for high school students, the problem is not that simple.”
Preparing to vote: See who’s running for president and compare their positions on important issues with our voter guide
DeSantis has seven days to sign or veto the bill. He has previously said he would not support legislation that does not withstand “legal muster.” Many other bills around the country have stalled in court battles, so this bill could be put to the test if it becomes law.
Florida Social Media Ban:Florida lawmakers seek to ban social media for minors: ‘woke’ censorship or safety?
What is Florida’s Social Media Ban for Minors HB 1?
HB 1 (Online Protection for Minors):
- Require social media platforms to prohibit children under the age of 15 from creating new accounts, terminate existing accounts believed to be held by children under the age of 15, and encourage parents and children to terminate accounts. Requires that requests be made.
- Requires social media platforms to verify the age of account holders using reasonable age verification methods, disclose specified policies, and provide specified resources, actions, and disclaimers. .
- Authorizes the Department of Law (DLA) to bring violations under the Florida Deception and Unfair Trade Practices Act.
- Penalties will be imposed.
- We declare that all social media platforms accessible in the State of Florida are subject to the jurisdiction of the state courts.
Supporters of the bill say the goal is not to keep kids off platforms, but to force platforms to change their addictive practices.
Senate revises age verification process and social media definition
Amendments to the bill aim to clarify what social media features trigger a ban and address privacy concerns regarding the age verification process. However, the bill passed Congress largely intact.
The senators tweaked the definition of social media platforms to require affected platforms to have some “addictive features” such as infinite scrolling, push notifications, and autoplaying videos.
Another change to the bill approved Wednesday would require social media and pornography platforms to offer users the option of anonymous age verification through third-party services that are not allowed to retain personally identifying information.
95% of teens ages 13 to 17 use social media
Social media has become almost ubiquitous among young people. According to the 2023 U.S. Surgeon General’s Recommendations on Social Media and Youth Mental Health, nearly 95% of youth ages 13 to 17 use social media platforms, and more than one-third “almost always.” ” They answered that they use it.
The recommendation concludes that further research is needed to fully understand the impact of social media. However, current research shows that there are some strengths and “sufficient indications that social media can pose significant harm to the mental health and well-being of children and adolescents.”
The potential benefits identified in this recommendation were community, connection, and self-expression. He also said social media can support the mental health of LGBTQ youth and help them develop their identities. Additionally, seven in 10 girls of color report encountering content on social media that affirms their race-related identity, the advisory states.
Potential harms from social media use included a greater risk of suffering from depression and anxiety. Some studies also show that adolescent girls are at greater risk for negative health outcomes, such as eating disorders and poor sleep.
Measures to restrict social media use by minors in Ohio and Utah stall due to lawsuits
Florida is not the first state to try to limit young people’s access to social media. Here are other states’ bills and how they were held up.
- Ohio – The Social Media Parental Notification Act prohibited the use of social media by youth under 16 without parental consent. The law was blocked by a federal judge after NetChoice, an industry group whose members include social media companies, challenged the constitutionality of the law.
- arkansas – Similar to Ohio, this law would require parental consent for minors to sign up for social media accounts. NetChoice has sued the state for violating the First Amendment, but no law has been enacted yet.
- Utah – In addition to requiring parental consent for minors to use social media, Utah law also requires teens to be offline from 10:30 p.m. to 6:30 a.m. There is. It was scheduled to take effect in March, but was postponed to October. 1 as it faces a lawsuit from NetChoice and digital rights group The Electronic Frontier Foundation. Lawmakers have introduced additional legislation in the 2024 legislative session that would seek to restrict social media for teenagers.
California is also engaged in a legal battle with NetChoice over a multifaceted law aimed at protecting children online.
Meta opposes HB1, NetChoice calls it ‘unconstitutional’
Still, Facebook’s parent company Meta opposes the bill. In a letter to the House Judiciary Committee about the original bill, the company argued that the bill would undermine parents’ ability to make decisions about their children’s social media use and raise data privacy concerns.
“While we recognize the goals of House Bill 1, the bill as currently drafted fails to give parents the power to decide whether their teens are allowed to use social media platforms. “We believe that we are not only capable of creating a robust industry, but we are also setting broad standards to help parents and young people manage their online activities.” The letter written by Calder Harville Childs states:
Mehta spokeswoman Rachel Holland said in an email statement Friday that HB1 needs to provide clear rules to parents.
“Teens move fluidly between online services, and the Youth Online Safety Act, which holds different services to different standards in different states, exposes teens to inconsistent protections online. ,” Holland said.
Carl Szabo, NetChoice’s vice president and general counsel, previously called the bill “unconstitutional.”
“If enacted, it would jeopardize the privacy and safety of Floridians who use the internet,” Szabo said in an emailed statement to USA TODAY in January. “The Free State of Florida deserves better than a massive Internet surveillance program that violates the Constitution.”
Their stance remains unchanged even as amendments to the bill make it to the governor’s desk. “While we appreciate the changes to HB 1, the bill few It’s unconstitutional, that’s still It is unconstitutional,” Szabo wrote Thursday.
Contributor: Brandon Girod, Emily Koblenz; USA TODAY Network