Florida Governor DeSantis Signs Online Verification Bill That Implements Digital ID Framework, Bans Children From Having Social Media

“HB 3: Online Protections for Minors” – which will be implemented beginning the first day of 2025 – lists the main issues the legislation is covering:

• Online Protections for Minors;
• Requiring social media platforms to prohibit certain minors from creating new accounts.
• Requiring social media platforms to terminate certain accounts and provide additional options for termination of such accounts;
• Providing conditions under which social media platforms are required to prohibit certain minors from entering into contracts to become account holders;
• Authorizing the Department of Legal Affairs to bring actions under the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act for knowing or reckless violations;
• Authorizing the department to issue and enforce civil investigative demands under certain circumstances, etc.

The law specifically bans minors younger than 14 from having social media profiles, while teens under 16 must receive parental consent.

Reclaim The Net explains that ‘in order for the law to make sense, in technical terms, social platforms clearly must be able to digitally verify their users age/ID. And once this is done, those under 14 who already have accounts will have them terminated, the law mandates.’

The original bill that was passed by the state Senate outright banned kids younger than 16 from having a social media account but was vetoed by DeSantis in February on the grounds that parental rights were not considered.

As usual opinions are split. Reclaim The Net reports:

As ever, there are coinciding and juxtaposed arguments in favor and against the law. They all purport to “care for the children” – but while supporters of the law say social media playground is a dangerous one, those opposing it see the harm as the right to anonymity online is removed and digital ID is pushed.

Interestingly, the proposals rely heavily on mental health arguments: the former to stress how harmful social platforms can be, in the words of DeSantis, “in a variety of ways” (anxiety, depression, both…) – while the latter play on the “isolation” card.

Namely, the fact that isolating people of any age from a social environment, albeit a virtual one, is harmful in and of itself. (One wonders, though, if those promoting this take on the law had the same sentiment about Covid restrictions and surveillance and the radical social isolation it imposed on EVERYONE).

Seemingly more substantial than the “forcing children into isolation” argument against the law is that it is simply not constitutional, specifically pertaining to the First Amendment and the right of parents vs. government(s).

This issue striking the 1st Amendment was raised by a number of groups, such as Florida Politics, noting that while the bill is well-intentioned it “poses challenges to the First Amendment rights guaranteed to all Americans, regardless of age,” they write. “The legislation directly violates the right to free speech by encroaching on the rights of younger users’ ability to access information and participate in online conversations…