Two States Can Now Restrict Social Media Access—Here’s What To Do Next
Last week, two federal appeals courts lifted injunctions, allowing Florida and Georgia to enforce laws restricting social media access for young people.
The laws will require platforms to age-gate users, with Florida banning anyone under 14 from opening accounts even with parental permission, while Georgia requires parental consent for users under 16. These restrictions will affect both minors and adults who must prove their age, potentially compromising privacy rights.
The Court Decisions
The opinions, issued by the same panel from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, allow enforcement despite recognizing that the laws target protected speech under the First Amendment. The court accepted the argument that social media use can be addictive based on time spent online, without distinguishing between harmful and beneficial use.
In Florida, H.B. 3 applies to platforms using algorithms, content uploads, and features like livestreaming or infinite scrolling—effectively covering all major social media services. Georgia's S.B. 351 requires parental consent and 'commercially reasonable efforts' to verify ages, creating hurdles for adults as well.
Impact on Users
Young people losing access will miss opportunities to connect with friends, access support groups, participate in political discussions, or share their artwork. The Florida law overrides parental autonomy by prohibiting even consenting parents from allowing their under-14 children on these platforms.
Documenting Harms
The Electronic Frontier Foundation is encouraging affected users to document their experiences, including screenshots, notes about when restrictions occurred, and details about what access was lost. They specifically want reports of age-check failures, incorrect age classifications, and instances where users abandon services rather than provide personal data.
Users can email EFF at [email protected] with their documentation. The organization plans to use these records to challenge the restrictions in both legislatures and courts while continuing to advocate for laws that protect online safety without compromising free expression or privacy.
Related
