With the arrival of the new year, several new state laws are now in effect. However, the most high-profile change — which limits children’s access to social media — will not be enforced immediately. The laws, passed during the 2024 legislative session, officially take effect this Wednesday.
These laws are part of a larger package of 299 bills that were approved by both the Legislature and Governor Ron DeSantis. While most of these new laws came into effect on July 1, the upcoming changes set to be enforced this week include a variety of other legislative updates.
House Bill 3 (HB 3), which focuses on social media restrictions for children, was one of the most significant pieces of legislation from the 2024 session. The bill, championed by then-House Speaker Paul Renner, R-Palm Coast, became a major priority during the legislative process. It quickly emerged as one of the most talked-about and debated issues of the session, drawing considerable attention due to its potential impact on children’s access to social media platforms.
The measure, introduced in HB 3, aims to restrict children under the age of 16 from opening social media accounts on certain platforms. While children aged 14 and 15 would be allowed to have accounts, parents must provide their consent for them to do so. However, children under 14 would be completely prohibited from creating accounts on these platforms.
Renner, the bill’s chief advocate, argued that social media companies have developed highly addictive platforms that pose significant risks to children’s mental health. He emphasized that these platforms can have a detrimental effect on young users, exposing them to harmful content and interactions. Additionally, Renner raised concerns about the potential for sexual predators to use social media as a tool for communicating with minors, further justifying the need for stricter regulations on children’s access to these platforms.
In October, the Computer & Communications Industry Association, along with NetChoice — two groups whose members include major tech companies like Google and Meta Platforms — filed a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the social media restrictions outlined in HB 3. The lawsuit argues that in a nation that values the First Amendment, the responsibility of deciding what content and online platforms children should have access to should lie with parents, not the government. The groups emphasized that parents already have numerous tools at their disposal to monitor and manage their children’s internet usage, and thus, the government should not impose such restrictions.
The groups are requesting a preliminary injunction to prevent the restrictions from being enforced while the legal challenge is ongoing. In response to this request, Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody agreed in November to delay enforcement of the law until Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Wilson makes a decision on the injunction. A hearing has been scheduled for February 28.
As part of this legal process, Florida agreed to halt enforcement of the law to allow for a full discovery process and a thorough examination of the case. Chase Sizemore, the press secretary for Attorney General Moody’s office, confirmed this delay in a statement, noting that it was to ensure all relevant facts were gathered before moving forward.
While the bill did not explicitly name the social media platforms that would be impacted by the restrictions, it did provide a definition of what constitutes a social media platform. The criteria for this definition include factors such as the use of algorithms, addictive features, and allowing users to interact with or view content shared by others.
The lawsuit challenging the social media restrictions in HB 3 frequently referenced platforms like YouTube and Facebook, while noting that services like Disney+ would not be affected by the law. The lawsuit argues that if social media companies violate these restrictions, they could face fines of up to $50,000 per violation, and could also be subject to lawsuits on behalf of minors. However, Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody is pressing ahead with another provision of HB 3 that requires age verification for accessing adult content websites. This part of the law has been challenged in a lawsuit filed on December 16 by the Free Speech Coalition, an adult entertainment industry group, and other plaintiffs, arguing that it infringes on First Amendment rights and other constitutional protections.
Supporters of the age-verification requirement argue it is necessary to prevent minors from accessing pornography online. In response to the law, the adult site Pornhub announced it would block access to Florida users starting Wednesday. The site displays a message warning users that they will be required to upload government-issued ID to prove they are 18 or older before accessing any adult content, claiming this is necessary to prevent minors from using the site but warning that such requirements could compromise user privacy.
Additionally, HB 135 addresses voter registration issues, specifically preventing changes to a person’s political party affiliation without their written consent. This bill came about after a software glitch unintentionally reset party affiliations for some Floridians renewing their driver’s licenses.
HB 267 involves building regulations and sets deadlines for local governments to approve or deny applications for small structures under 7,500 square feet and disaster recovery projects. It also mandates changes to the state building code for things like replacement windows, doors, and garage doors, and includes new standards for auditing private providers, pathways for residential building inspector licensure, and removes the need for sealed drawings for certain replacements that meet state standards.
Another law, SB 184, known as the “Halo Law,” focuses on protecting first responders. This measure makes it a second-degree misdemeanor to come within 25 feet of a first responder after being verbally warned not to approach. The bill was hailed as a way to safeguard law enforcement and other emergency workers. Governor Ron DeSantis, when signing the bill in April, emphasized that while some states were reducing support for law enforcement, Florida was committed to being a supportive environment for its police officers and first responders.
In March, The Rutherford Institute, a civil liberties organization, raised concerns about SB 184, the “Halo Law,” which imposes a 25-foot “no-go zone” around first responders. The Institute warned that the law was unnecessary and could give law enforcement broad discretion to misuse the measure. John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute, argued in a letter to Governor Ron DeSantis that the law’s vague language, combined with the lack of clear safeguards for First Amendment activities like observing or recording first responders, could undermine free speech. Whitehead expressed concern that this could lead to government officials abusing their authority and infringing on the rights they are supposed to protect.
In other legislative developments, Senate Bill 362 focuses on improving medical reimbursement rates within Florida’s Workers’ Compensation Law. The bill aims to increase the reimbursement rates for physicians, surgical procedures, and expert witness fees, making it more financially viable for healthcare providers to treat workers injured on the job.
Senate Bill 556, on the other hand, tackles financial exploitation, particularly against seniors and other vulnerable adults. The bill grants financial institutions the authority to delay transactions if financial exploitation is suspected. Institutions must notify account holders and their trusted contacts within three days of flagged transactions, and they are required to conduct internal reviews. The law caps transaction delays at 15 business days but allows extensions of up to 30 days for further investigation.
Senate Bill 892 addresses dental insurance claims, implementing protections for both dentists and patients. The bill prohibits restrictive contracts that limit payment methods and prevents insurers from charging fees for payment transmissions without the patient’s consent. It also bars insurers from denying claims for procedures that have already been pre-authorized, ensuring a smoother process for both providers and patients.
Lastly, Senate Bill 7054 revises the regulations for private activity bonds, which are used to fund public-benefit projects. The bill aims to maximize the use of bonds for public improvements by consolidating infrequently used bond pools and extending the carryforward provisions for unused volume cap allocations. This will make the bond program more efficient and allow for better financing of public projects in the state.
or a specific category with our 
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.