Federal judge blocks Florida's social media ban for children
June 3 (UPI) -- A federal judge in Florida on Tuesday temporarily blocked a state ban on social media for children, calling it "likely unconstitutional."
Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Walker issued a 58-page order, reversing part of the 2024 state law, which prohibits anyone under the age of 16 from using certain social media platforms, with the exception of 14- and 15-year-olds who have parental permission.
"Although this court today finds that Florida's challenged law is likely unconstitutional, it does not doubt that parents and legislators in the state have sincere concerns about the effects that social media use may have on youth, nor does it render parents or the state powerless to address those concerns," Walker wrote.
House Bill 3, also called "Online Protections for Minors," received bipartisan support when it passed last year. The bill, which was signed into law by Gov. Ron DeSantis, requires social media sites to delete accounts for anyone under the age of 14 or face hefty fines.
The law was scheduled to go into effect on Jan. 1, but the state attorney general's office agreed not to enforce it until the judge could rule on the request for a preliminary injunction. NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association, which represents social media platforms including Meta, Google and Snapchat, filed their lawsuit in October.
"This ruling vindicates our argument that Florida's statute violates the First Amendment by blocking and restricting minors -- and likely adults as well -- from using certain social media websites to view lawful content," Matt Schruers, president of Computer & Communications Industry Association, said Tuesday in a statement.
While the judge focused on the social media provisions of the law, he left intact the age verification requirement to access pornographic websites.
"An established principle of the First Amendment context is that enabling individuals to voluntarily restrict problematic content at the receiving end is preferred over restricting speech at the source," Walker wrote.
"In this context, that means that parents are best positioned to make the appropriately individualized determinations about whether or when their children should use social media platforms," the judge added.
Attorney General James Uthmeier, who was named as a defendant in the case, disagreed with Tuesday's ruling. His office said it plans to appeal.
"Florida parents voted through their elected representatives for a law protecting kids from the harmful and sometimes lifelong tragic impacts of social media," said spokesperson Jeremy Redfern.
"These platforms do not have a constitutional right to addict kids to their products."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Germany's Friedrich Merz to meet with Donald Trump in Oval Office
June 5 (UPI) -- German Chancellor Friedrich Merz will be in Washington Thursday to meet with President Donald Trump in person for the first time. Merz said that he was looking forward to his first face-to-face meeting with Trump after the two have previously spoken over the phone "Our alliance with America was, is, and remains of paramount importance for the security, freedom, and prosperity of Europe. The United States is an indispensable friend and partner of Germany," Merz posted to X Wednesday. The topics of discussion are expected to range from tariffs and trade to Russia's war on Ukraine and the state of the Middle East. Trump and Merz reportedly speak with each other on a first-name basis, however, in a speech given Tuesday, German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul described the current tone of German-U.S. relations as being "as rough as it has not been in a long time." Trump has also levied tariffs on all member nations of the European Union, Germany included, that will impose a 50% duty on all European goods starting July 9, a deadline that was extended from June 1 to allow more time for trade negotiations. The Trump administration has also upped tariffs on all aluminum and steel imports from 25% to 50%, with only Britain excluded. Germany announced last week it will provide a nearly $5.7 billion military aid package to Ukraine that will finance long-range weapons to be produced by Ukraine, which Merz announced can be deployed by the Ukrainian military for use inside the borders of Russia. Trump, however, had ordered a pause on military aid to Ukraine in March shortly after his combative February meeting with Zelensky. It is unclear if Trump has any issue with Germany's aid for or relationship with Ukraine.
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Supreme Court backs Catholic Charities' push to object to state taxes on religious grounds
The Supreme Court on Thursday cleared the way for a Catholic Charities chapter in Wisconsin to secure an exemption from certain state taxes in a decision that could expand the type of religious entities entitled to tax breaks under the First Amendment's protections for religion. It was the latest in a series of decisions from the Supreme Court in recent years that have sided with religious groups on everything from public funding for sectarian schools to allowing coaches to offer private prayers on the field after high school football games. 'It is fundamental to our constitutional order that the government maintain 'neutrality between religion and religion,'' Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote for a unanimous court. 'There may be hard calls to make in policing that rule, but this is not one. When the government distinguishes among religions based on theological differences in their provision of services, it imposes a denominational preference that must satisfy the highest level of judicial scrutiny,' she added. The Catholic Charities Bureau and four affiliate organizations had claimed that Wisconsin violated the First Amendment's religious protections by denying exemptions from the state's unemployment taxes. Churches already receive that exemption and so the question for the justices was, in essence, whether religiously affiliated entities that don't perform traditionally religious functions – such as services – should also qualify. The bureau describes itself as the 'social ministry arm of the Diocese of Superior' of Wisconsin and says that it carries out a 'wide variety of ministries for the elderly, the disabled, the poor,' and others. Wisconsin had argued that Catholic Charities had been participating in its unemployment insurance program without complaint since 1971. Forty-seven states and the federal government include exemptions from unemployment taxes for religious organizations similar to Wisconsin's, suggesting the court's decision could have an impact beyond the Badger State. The Trump administration sided with Catholic Charities, and it was concerned a broad ruling might affect the similar federal law. The Justice Department told the court it interprets federal law to exempt Catholic Charities and similar groups. Justice Clarence Thomas, a member of the court's conservative wing, wrote separately to argue in favor of a doctrine of 'church autonomy' that would further insulate religious institutions from taxes and government regulations. Thomas argued that the state court went too far by looking into how Catholic Charities was structured. 'The First Amendment's guarantee of church autonomy gives religious institutions the right to define their internal governance structures without state interference,' Thomas wrote. 'Perhaps the most important feature of today's ruling is that there was not a majority to take up the issue Justice Thomas wrote separately to underscore—whether regulations governing the tax-exempt status of religious organizations implicates, in Thomas's words, 'the First Amendment's guarantee of church autonomy,'' said Steve Vladeck, CNN Supreme Court analyst and professor at Georgetown University Law Center. 'By deciding this case (unanimously) on narrower grounds, the Court saves the much more fraught question of the extent to which the First Amendment does require church autonomy—and what that would mean for all kinds of local, state, and federal regulations—for a future case.' The majority concluded that Wisconsin's law, as interpreted by the state's top court, discriminated between religions because the groups performing the charity work did not proselytize – even though the group's faith bars practitioners from doing so. 'A law that differentiates between religions along theological lines is textbook denominational discrimination,' Sotomayor wrote for the court. 'Wisconsin's exemption, as interpreted by its Supreme Court, thus grants a denominational preference by explicitly differentiating between religions based on theological practices,' she wrote. Though technical, the case raised fundamental questions about the ability of courts to look behind the pulpit to assess the religiosity of certain organizations. Chief Justice John Roberts pressed the attorney representing Catholic Charities in March by asking whether a vegetarian restaurant might be entitled to an exemption from state taxes in the group's view if its owners claimed they were following a religious tenet against eating meat. Along those same lines, a question lurking behind the case was how it might apply to religiously affiliated hospitals. Approximately 787,000 employees work for six multibillion-dollar Catholic-affiliated health care systems, according to the Freedom from Religion Foundation, which filed a brief supporting the state. The Service Employees International Union, which also backs the state, estimated that more than a million workers are employed by religiously affiliated organizations. The conservative justices on the Supreme Court have in recent years blurred the line that once clearly separated church from state in a series of rulings siding with religious entities. They have done so in part on the theory that some government efforts intended to comply with the First Amendment's establishment clause have been overbroad and discriminated against religion. The court has expanded the circumstances under which taxpayer money may fund religious schools, for instance, it allowed a public high school football coach to pray on the 50-yard line and ruled that Boston could not block a Christian group from raising a flag at City Hall. But in this case, liberal Justice Elena Kagan signaled during the argument that she, too, had concerns with the idea that courts might take it upon themselves to second guess what sorts of activities might count as religious. It was clear in March that a majority of the justices were alarmed by the decision from the Wisconsin Supreme Court, which concluded that the work Catholic Charities performed was 'wholly' secular. 'Such services can be provided by organizations of either religious or secular motivations, and the services provided would not differ in any sense,' the majority wrote. In a dissent, two Wisconsin justices said that the court's decision 'looks through a seemingly Protestant lens to deem works of charity worthy of the exemption only if accompanied by proselytizing – a combination forbidden by Catholicism, Judaism, and many other religions.' By choosing which religions may benefit from the break, the dissent said, the state court's interpretation violated the First Amendment. Catholic Charities argued that its employees would continue to have unemployment coverage but that it would be provided by a church-affiliated entity rather than the state. The group's opponents say employees in other workplaces may not be so lucky and have noted that the state cannot guarantee that those plans will pay out when employees lose their jobs. This story has been updated with additional details.
UPI
39 minutes ago
- UPI
Watch: Nintendo launches the Switch 2 console
June 5 (UPI) -- Nintendo released on Thursday its next console, a sequel to the best-selling Switch named Switch 2. The Nintendo Switch 2 is available to purchase for $449, or in a $499 bundle that includes new title Mario Kart World. A standalone copy of Mario Kart World retails for $79.99, meaning customers can save money on the Switch 2's premiere game with the bundle. The Switch 2, like its predecessor, is a home console that can be taken on the go. New features include a 7.9-inch screen that supports 4K resolution when docked and connected to a television, and a voice chat system that can be paired with a new camera peripheral. The console uses new Joy-Con 2 controllers that connect to the Switch 2 magnetically. The Joy-Con 2 controllers also support mouse controls Nintendo celebrated the Switch 2's release and other games that are available on the system in a new trailer. Other notable launch games include enhanced versions of The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild and its sequel Tears of the Kingdom, Cyberpunk 2077: Ultimate Edition, Street Fighter 6, Deltarune Chapters 1-4, Split Fiction, Hogwarts Legacy, Fortnite, Civilization VII and more. Nintendo's next big game for the Switch 2 is Donkey Kong Bananza, which will be released on July 17. Other notable game coming in the future include Hyrule Warriors: Age of Imprisonment, Kirby AirRiders and the long-awaited Hollow Knight sequel Hollow Knight: Silksong.
