Washington – The Computer & Communications Industry Association has filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of HB3, Florida’s latest internet law that would restrict users’ access to lawful content that is protected by the First Amendment. CCIA, with co-Plaintiff NetChoice, asks the court for an injunction that will block HB3 from taking effect on January 1, 2025.
HB3 is unlawful for several reasons, including:
- It covers only the websites that minors like to use regularly, effectively punishing those users—and their favorite websites—in a manner wholly inconsistent with the First Amendment.
- It completely prohibits minors under age 14 from creating accounts on the websites it covers.
- It requires 14- and 15-year old minors to obtain parental consent before creating accounts, which likewise restricts core First Amendment activity. In an attempt to save HB3 from an adverse court decision, Florida created a default alternative whereby these minors would simply be banned, only exacerbating the First Amendment injury.
- It endangers adults’ access to lawful content by imposing harsh sanctions to punish websites when they are deceived into creating an account for a minor.
- It restricts the First Amendment rights of websites to display lawful content.
CCIA makes clear in the complaint that it supports enhanced protections for younger users online. In a nation that values the First Amendment, the preferred response is to let parents decide which speech and websites their minor children may access online — including by utilizing the many tools digital services providers give to parents for monitoring their children’s activities on the internet.
The following can be attributed to Stephanie Joyce, Senior Vice President and Chief of Staff:
“This social media law infringes on the First Amendment rights of both minors and adults by creating significant barriers to accessing online information that every American, including minors, has a right to see. Protecting children online is an important goal that CCIA shares with legislators, and the far better way to ensure their protection is to give parents the information and tools they need to shield their children from unsuitable content, as digital services providers already have done for decades.”
