Statewiseby[codeliance]Alpha
← Back to map

Florida

Researchedlast verified 2026-07-04

Has regulations

HB 3 (Online Protections for Minors) authored: minor-account provisions currently enforceable after the Eleventh Circuit stayed the district-court injunction (2025-11-25). Coverage may be incomplete pending a full sweep of Florida minor-protection statutes.

Online Protections for Minors (HB 3)

Enforceable pending appealResearchedlast verified 2026-07-04
Social media platform

N.D. Fla. (Judge Mark Walker) preliminarily enjoined HB 3's minor-account provisions on 2025-06-03; the Eleventh Circuit stayed that injunction 2-1 on 2025-11-25, holding the law likely survives intermediate scrutiny, so HB 3 is enforceable pending the merits appeal.

HB 3 also contains a separate 'material harmful to minors' age-verification regime for commercial pornography sites (the 33.3%-of-content threshold), which is a separate provision from the social-media minor-account rules covered here and is not decomposed in this record. Statute section pins pending a pass against the enrolled text.

Scope

The minor-account duties bind a 'social media platform,' defined conjunctively as an online service that (a) lets users upload or view others' content, (b) has 10% or more of its daily active users under 16 who average 2+ hours/day on it, (c) uses an algorithm to select content, and (d) offers at least one addictive feature (infinite scroll, push notifications, engagement metrics such as likes/shares, autoplay, or live-streaming).

Coverage conditions
  • 10% or more of the service's daily active users are under 16 and average 2 or more hours per day on it.(Fla. Stat. § 501.1736 (HB 3, ch. 2024-42), section pin pending verification)
  • The service uses an algorithm to select content and offers at least one addictive feature (infinite scroll, push notifications, engagement metrics such as likes/shares, autoplay, or live-streaming).(Fla. Stat. § 501.1736 (HB 3, ch. 2024-42), section pin pending verification)
Express exemptions
  • Services whose exclusive function is email or direct messaging are excluded.

Penalties

Model
Per violation
Detail
Violations are unfair/deceptive trade practices under FDUTPA; civil penalties up to $50,000 per violation, plus attorney's fees and court costs, and punitive damages for knowing/reckless patterns
Enforcer
Florida Department of Legal Affairs (Attorney General)
Private right of action
Yes

Key dates

Signed
2024-03-25
Effective
2025-01-01

Obligations (2)

Parental consentUnder 1313–15

Prohibit account creation by minors under 14, and require verifiable parental consent for 14- and 15-year-olds; terminate non-compliant accounts subject to a dispute period.

Statute’s own ages: Under 14: no account permitted; 14-15: account only with verifiable parental consent; 16 and older: unrestricted

Fla. Stat. § 501.1736 (HB 3, ch. 2024-42), section pin pending verification
Age verification / estimationUnder 1313–15

Use a reasonable age-verification method (including an anonymous third-party option) to determine whether a user falls under the covered age lines.

Statute’s own ages: The statute pivots at 14 (account ban) and 16 (definition of a covered minor for account rules)

Fla. Stat. § 501.1736 (HB 3, ch. 2024-42), section pin pending verification

Litigation history

  1. 2025-06-03
    N.D. Fla. (Judge Mark Walker) granted a preliminary injunction blocking HB 3's minor-account (under-14 ban and 14-15 parental-consent) provisions in CCIA & NetChoice v. Uthmeier
    Minor-account provisions unenforceable while the injunction stood source ↗
  2. 2025-11-25
    Eleventh Circuit (2-1) granted the State's motion to stay the preliminary injunction pending appeal, finding HB 3 likely constitutional under intermediate scrutiny (Rosenbaum, J., dissenting)
    Enforceable pending the merits appeal source ↗

Cross-state comparisons

  • similartx-hb18 (Texas): Companion 2024-era minor-protection laws; both impose age-determination and parental duties on social online services and were preliminarily enjoined on First Amendment grounds. FL HB 3's injunction was stayed (enforceable); TX HB 18's remains in place.
  • similarms-hb1126 (Mississippi): Both require age determination and parental gating for minors and reached appellate stays that left the laws enforceable pending merits review.