Florida can enforce state law barring young kids from social media, appeals court rules

By Diana Novak Jones

Oct 14 (Reuters) - A federal appeals court on Wednesday allowed Florida to enforce a state law barring children under 14 from accessing social media platforms like Instagram, TikTok or Snapchat, rejecting tech industry groups' claims that the law violates the US Constitution’s free speech protections.

In a unanimous ruling, a three-judge panel on the Atlanta-based 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a lower court’s preliminary injunction blocking the law, known as H.B. 3. The court said the law does not regulate the content hosted by social media sites and therefore doesn’t run afoul of the First Amendment.

“HB3 applies to platforms wholly without regard to the topics discussed or the ideas or messages conveyed on them,” wrote Circuit Judge Kevin Newsom, an appointee of President Donald Trump. “Truth Social is just as likely as Instagram to be affected by HB3.”

Representatives for Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier, who defended the law, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The law bars social media platforms that have so-called addictive features, which include things like video autoplay and infinite scroll, from allowing children under the age of 14 to create accounts.

Tech industry groups NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association, which count Meta Platforms, TikTok and Snap as members, had sued in 2024 to block the law.

In a statement after the ruling on Wednesday, Paul Taske, director of the NetChoice Litigation Center, said the group is "currently evaluating all of our options as we continue the fight to ensure Floridians’ rights to free expression online are protected, and parents remain in the driver’s seat when it comes to making decisions for their families."

SNAP SUED

Florida was among the first of several states to pass a law regulating social media use for children amid a broader reckoning over the apps’ role in young people’s mental health.

After H.B. 3 took effect, Uthmeier sued Snapchat owner Snap Inc in April 2025, accusing it of illegally employing features that addict children and opening accounts for children aged 13 and younger. Snap said H.B. 3 and the lawsuit sought to restrict teens' speech online in violation of the US Constitution.

A few months later, the judge overseeing the industry groups' lawsuit granted their request for a preliminary injunction blocking the law’s enforcement, saying H.B. 3 was likely unconstitutional.

Uthmeier appealed that ruling to the 11th Circuit, and the court had stayed the injunction while it weighed the case.

Separately, a lower court overseeing Florida’s case against Snap had rejected the state’s request in August 2025 to order Snap to comply with H.B. 3, also finding the law likely violated constitutional rights. But in a second ruling on Wednesday, the 11th Circuit vacated that decision and said the case should move forward in state court, not federal.

A representative for Snap declined to comment.

The case is CCIA and NetChoice v. Uthmeier, 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals, number 25-11881.

For CCIA and NetChoice: Erin Murphy of Clement & Murphy

For Florida: Jeffrey DeSousa of the Florida Attorney General's Office