Another activist judge has struck a blow against parental rights, banning a law that would have protected children from social media addiction.
U.S. District Judge Mark Walker issued a preliminary injunction against Florida’s HB 3, claiming the law violates the First Amendment despite overwhelming evidence of social media’s harmful effects on youth mental health.
The law, signed by Governor Ron DeSantis earlier this year, would have prohibited social media platforms from allowing children under 14 to create accounts and required parental consent for users under 16.
It was scheduled to take effect January 1 but will now remain on hold while litigation continues, leaving Florida’s children vulnerable to the predatory practices of Big Tech companies.
While acknowledging legitimate concerns about social media’s impact on children, Judge Walker still sided with tech industry groups NetChoice and the Computer and Communications Industry Association, which challenged the law.
These groups have successfully blocked similar protective measures in Utah and California, demonstrating a pattern of prioritizing corporate profits over children’s well-being.
Florida’s Attorney General’s office has vowed to appeal the decision to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, defending parents’ right to protect their children from online harms.
The state maintains that social media companies should not have unlimited access to manipulate young minds.
Uthmeier’s press secretary Jae Williams said in a statement:
“Florida parents voted through their elected representatives for a law protecting kids from the harmful and sometimes lifelong tragic impacts of social media. These platforms do not have a constitutional right to addict kids to their products.”
The judge did allow one portion of the law to stand—the provision requiring platforms to shut down accounts for children under 16 if a parent or guardian requests it.
However, this minimal concession falls far short of the comprehensive protections Florida lawmakers intended to provide for families struggling with social media’s addictive design and harmful content.
Similar legal battles are unfolding across the country as conservative states attempt to protect children from the documented mental health crisis associated with social media use.
In Georgia, another law requiring age verification and parental permission for users under 16 is facing judicial scrutiny, and the tech industry is deploying the same free speech arguments.
Predictably, the tech industry celebrated the Florida ruling as a victory.
NetChoice representative Chris Marchese claimed the decision affirms constitutional rights.
This conveniently ignores growing evidence that social media platforms are designed to be addictive and have been linked to rising rates of depression, anxiety, and self-harm among young users.
Moreover, this ruling represents yet another example of unelected judges overriding the will of voters who elected representatives to protect their children.
The decision undermines parental authority and hands control back to Silicon Valley companies whose algorithms target vulnerable youth with content designed to maximize engagement regardless of harm.
Florida’s approach was reasonable and balanced—it did not ban content but simply required age verification and parental involvement for minor users.
The state’s appeal will continue the fight to restore these common-sense protections that the vast majority of parents support across political lines.
