Fla. Bill Banning Kids From Social Media Advances to House Floor
Democrats peppered a Florida age-verification bill’s sponsors with questions Wednesday on their proposal to remove kids younger than 16 from social media platforms this summer. Several young people gave forceful testimony against the bill at the livestreamed hearing. But the state's House Judiciary Committee voted 17-5 to advance HB-1 to the floor.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
In other legislative action, Democratic opponents of the state's social media bill endorsed an age-verification measure targeting pornography websites. The committee voted 21-0 as it advanced HB-3. The bill would require age verification on websites that publish or distribute porn and prohibit access to those younger than 18. A subcommittee cleared HB-1 and HB-3 last week (see 2401110044). Their low bill numbers indicate they are priorities for Florida's House leadership.
July 1 “is the date by which there will no longer be a Florida child under the age of 16 on the social media platforms that are defined in the bill,” said HB-1 co-sponsor Rep. Fiona McFarland (R). The committee voted by voice to adopt an amendment from primary sponsor Tyler Sirois (R) clarifying that a nongovernmental, independent third party would conduct age verification.
Rep. Dianne Hart (D) asked why kids couldn’t use social media even with parental consent under HB-1. Sirois replied, "That bright line must exist to protect minors under 16,” and there is a "compelling state interest to keep our kids safe from the content and the addictive features" in social media. Parents can’t give consent for kids to go into casinos, either, Sirois added.
Yet Rep. Bracy Davis (D) argued parents should decide whether their kids can use a social platform. Also, she asked what happens if a platform can't identify a user as a child and parents don’t report the child. McFarland said there would be no legal ramifications. However, Sirois suggested such a situation might indicate “the intent of our [proposed] law is not being followed.”
Rep. Dotie Joseph (D) asked how HB-1 would affect kids making money through social media to support themselves, their families or their communities. In addition, she urged bill sponsors to consider U.S. and Florida constitutional protections against impairing contracts. McFarland replied that social media’s “harms outweigh the good.” Joseph asked if sponsors might consider amending the bill to narrowly exempt kids who must use social media for educational or other approved uses. Sirois noted the bill has an exemption for career development.
“I let the Constitution be my guide and this age verification process worries me,” said Rep. Yvonne Hinson (D), who voted no on HB-1. Hinson is especially concerned about requiring older users to submit sensitive information. Sirois noted that some software doesn’t require submission of documents verifying age. McFarland said sensitive documents collected couldn’t be retained long-term. Responding to other members’ questions, she noted that some third-party verification software can estimate age through facial recognition and that companies probably can also discern users’ ages by posts and viewed content.
"There is an epidemic and we can fix it, but this is just not the right solution yet,” said ranking member Mike Gottlieb (D). Not allowing parents to give children consent is not the “least restrictive means” to make such a policy, he said. Gottlieb also raised concerns about how HB-1 would be enforced. He asked how a social platform could defend an age verification decision if it’s not allowed to retain data it used to make the decision.
Not all committee Democrats opposed HB-1. Rep. Kristen Arrington (D) said she would support the bill Wednesday because she hopes to work on edits. Earlier in the hearing, Arrington asked if the state could allow kids to at least have business pages if not personal accounts. The bill doesn’t differentiate, answered McFarland. "Social media is a harmful product" whether you're "wearing your personal glasses versus your business glasses,” she said.
"I have to be part of this conversation,” said Rep. Kevin Chambliss (D), who also backed HB-1 in committee. While Chambliss said he won’t commit to voting yes on the floor, he acknowledged it “gets so ugly” on social media. Tech companies aren't addressing these problems, he said. On concerns about the bill not allowing parental consent, Chambliss said even the best parents don’t always get it right.
Social media was key to Taylor Thigpen founding a successful online business, PlantKingUSA, when he was 15. Now in high school, Thigpen testified at the hearing. Thigpen said he used earnings from his business to pay his private school tuition. Social media fuels his generation’s activism, he added.
Digital Democracy Project legislative coordinator Charles Horowitz asked Florida lawmakers, “What makes 9 a good age to force a girl to give birth, 18 the appropriate age to carry an assault weapon, but 15 an inappropriate age to have a LinkedIn page?"
HB-1 removes parents' authority, said Caulder Harvill-Childs, Meta public policy manager-Southeast. He also raised data privacy concerns with the bill requiring people of all ages to provide materials to verify their ages and repeat the process for the many apps they may use.