Federal appeals court speeds up Florida social media fight
By Jim Saunders - News Service of Florida
December 14, 2025 at 5:00 AM EST
The stay ruling at least temporarily allowed enforcement of the law — though it did not resolve the underlying issues in the appeal. In seeking expedited handling, the industry groups alleged harm if the law is enforced.
A federal appeals court Thursday agreed to speed up consideration of a closely watched case about a 2024 Florida law designed to prevent children from having access to certain social-media sites.
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted a request by the tech-industry groups NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association to “expedite” oral arguments and a decision in the case about whether the law violates First Amendment rights.
The Atlanta-based appeals court ordered that arguments be held during the week of Feb. 23, though it did not immediately specify a date.
The industry groups on Dec. 3 requested expedited handling of the case after a panel of the appeals court allowed Florida to enforce the law while the legal fight continues to play out.
U.S. District Judge Mark Walker in June issued a preliminary injunction to block the law (HB 3), agreeing with the industry groups that it likely violated the First Amendment. The state appealed Walker’s decision, and the appeals-court panel on Nov. 25 approved a stay of the preliminary injunction.
The stay ruling at least temporarily allowed enforcement of the law — though it did not resolve the underlying issues in the appeal. In seeking expedited handling, the industry groups alleged harm if the law is enforced.
“Florida House Bill 3 is the latest attempt in a long line of government efforts to restrict new forms of constitutionally protected expression based on concerns about their potential effects on minors,” attorneys for the groups wrote. “This constitutional challenge to its restrictions accordingly raises exceptionally important issues about the First Amendment rights of … Computer & Communications Industry Association and NetChoice members to communicate with their users and the First Amendment rights of those users to access some of the most popular online services operated. Those rights are under threat of immediate harm because the injunction (the industry groups) had obtained to prevent HB 3’s enforcement and to safeguard members’ and their users’ constitutional rights is now stayed.”
But Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier’s office last week argued the appeals court should reject the request to speed up the case. In a court document, the state’s lawyers said the stay “returned the parties to the status quo” before Walker issued the preliminary injunction.
“Before the district court issued the preliminary injunction, HB 3 was in effect for several months,” the state’s lawyers wrote. “Plaintiffs identify no ‘good cause’ for expediting the appeal now. They speculate that there is ‘potential for irreparable harm to the First Amendment rights of’ their ‘members and their users.’ Yet this court (the panel) concluded in its stay order that ‘it is unlikely that HB 3 inappropriately curtails any First Amendment rights.’”
The law prevents children under age 14 from opening accounts on certain platforms — which court documents indicate could include platforms such as Snapchat, Instagram, Facebook and YouTube. Parents would have to give consent for 14- and 15-year-olds to have accounts on the platforms.
The law does not name platforms that would be affected, but it includes criteria such as whether platforms’ features include infinite scroll and autoplay. Supporters of the law contend that the targeted platforms have addictive features that harm children’s mental health.
The industry groups filed the First Amendment challenge last year in federal court in Tallahassee. The group’s members include companies such as Google, Meta Platforms and Snap Inc., the operator of Snapchat.
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted a request by the tech-industry groups NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association to “expedite” oral arguments and a decision in the case about whether the law violates First Amendment rights.
The Atlanta-based appeals court ordered that arguments be held during the week of Feb. 23, though it did not immediately specify a date.
The industry groups on Dec. 3 requested expedited handling of the case after a panel of the appeals court allowed Florida to enforce the law while the legal fight continues to play out.
U.S. District Judge Mark Walker in June issued a preliminary injunction to block the law (HB 3), agreeing with the industry groups that it likely violated the First Amendment. The state appealed Walker’s decision, and the appeals-court panel on Nov. 25 approved a stay of the preliminary injunction.
The stay ruling at least temporarily allowed enforcement of the law — though it did not resolve the underlying issues in the appeal. In seeking expedited handling, the industry groups alleged harm if the law is enforced.
“Florida House Bill 3 is the latest attempt in a long line of government efforts to restrict new forms of constitutionally protected expression based on concerns about their potential effects on minors,” attorneys for the groups wrote. “This constitutional challenge to its restrictions accordingly raises exceptionally important issues about the First Amendment rights of … Computer & Communications Industry Association and NetChoice members to communicate with their users and the First Amendment rights of those users to access some of the most popular online services operated. Those rights are under threat of immediate harm because the injunction (the industry groups) had obtained to prevent HB 3’s enforcement and to safeguard members’ and their users’ constitutional rights is now stayed.”
But Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier’s office last week argued the appeals court should reject the request to speed up the case. In a court document, the state’s lawyers said the stay “returned the parties to the status quo” before Walker issued the preliminary injunction.
“Before the district court issued the preliminary injunction, HB 3 was in effect for several months,” the state’s lawyers wrote. “Plaintiffs identify no ‘good cause’ for expediting the appeal now. They speculate that there is ‘potential for irreparable harm to the First Amendment rights of’ their ‘members and their users.’ Yet this court (the panel) concluded in its stay order that ‘it is unlikely that HB 3 inappropriately curtails any First Amendment rights.’”
The law prevents children under age 14 from opening accounts on certain platforms — which court documents indicate could include platforms such as Snapchat, Instagram, Facebook and YouTube. Parents would have to give consent for 14- and 15-year-olds to have accounts on the platforms.
The law does not name platforms that would be affected, but it includes criteria such as whether platforms’ features include infinite scroll and autoplay. Supporters of the law contend that the targeted platforms have addictive features that harm children’s mental health.
The industry groups filed the First Amendment challenge last year in federal court in Tallahassee. The group’s members include companies such as Google, Meta Platforms and Snap Inc., the operator of Snapchat.