Latest news with #MichaelMoline
Yahoo
5 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Federal judge blocks enforcement of law barring kids from social media
The Joseph Woodrow Hatchett U.S. Courthouse and Federal Building in Tallahassee, Sept. 27, 2022. Credit: Michael Moline A federal judge blocked on Tuesday the state's enforcement of a 2024 state law requiring social media platforms to delete accounts of kids 15 years old and younger. The preliminary victory for the two trade associations representing social media giants comes after U.S. District Judge Mark Walker had dismissed the suit in March because the companies had not proven they would be affected. However, Walker barred the state from enforcing the law on Tuesday (HB 3), writing that it stifled minors' First Amendment rights and that there were other avenues to combat mental health concerns associated with the use of social media. 'Assuming the significance of the State's interest in limiting the exposure of youth to websites with 'addictive features,' the law's restrictions are an extraordinarily blunt instrument for furthering it,' Walker wrote. NetChoice and Computer & Communications Industry Association, representing companies including Google, Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, and YouTube, filed the suit against the law in October and the former Attorney General Ashley Moody had agreed not to enforce it while the parties waited for a decision from Walker on whether to temporarily block it or allow fines of up to $50,000 per violation. The attorney general's office will appeal Walker's block to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, said Jeremy Redfern, the attorney general's director of communications, in an email to Florida Phoenix. 'Florida parents voted through their elected representatives for a law protecting kids from the harmful and sometimes lifelong tragic impacts of social media,' Redfern wrote. 'These platforms do not have a constitutional right to addict kids to their products.' Walker disagreed with the state's argument that parental control features weren't enough to protect kids from addictive features and that the law only prohibits kids from having accounts and doesn't restrict access to the content altogether. 'While it is true that at least one of these platforms, YouTube, does not require users to be account holders to passively view some content, all require users to hold accounts in order to share one's own content—in other words, to speak,' Walker wrote. CCI's president and CEO, Matt Schruers, celebrated the ruling. '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 websites to view lawful content,' he wrote in a press release. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Would Floridians notice if state government shut down?
Florida's Old Capitol and New Capitol, viewed from the Leon County Courthouse on March 21, 2022. (Photo by Michael Moline/Florida Phoenix) While the Florida Legislature exhibits nowhere near the level of bile-spitting, brainless dysfunction you get in Washington, they haven't exactly been a model of a sleek, responsive government machine. For weeks, there was no budget. No hint of a budget. Instead of getting done the one thing the Constitution says they have to get done, they've been indulging in that sure-fire negotiating tactic: insulting each other. Then Friday: a trickle of white smoke emanating from the Capitol. Habemus budget! A budget framework, anyway. It's a bit short on details, other than 'permanent sales tax exemptions targeted toward Florida families,' elimination of sales tax on commercial leases, and a boost to the state's rainy-day fund. Money for education, health care, environmental restoration, culture, roads — little stuff like that — has yet to be spelled out. Seems House and Senate leaders will be meeting this week to thrash out details and plan, they claim, to hold a vote by June 16. Things remain contentious, and that's not counting the wild card in the process: our congenitally angry governor. He can veto appropriations he doesn't like or, knowing him, appropriations he thinks his legislative enemies particularly care about. The state budget is not yet a done deal. If it's not passed by June 30, we could even have a government shutdown. Thought experiment: Would you notice? Bears might: Shuttered FWC offices could slow down final approval for bear hunting, passed by this year after passionate lobbying from the Davy Crockett Caucus. State workers might: Their paychecks would be suspended. Holders of state contracts might: They'll be in limbo. Anyone wanting to visit a state park might: The gates will be locked. Still, most Floridians probably wouldn't realize their government isn't working. It often doesn't. Work, that is. Instead of addressing our numerous problems, from unaffordable housing to unaffordable insurance to inflation to flooding, elected officials prefer to spend much of their time worrying about pronouns, boasting about helping Trump's storm troopers arrest brown folks, or trying to rename the Gulf of Mexico. Floridians don't expect much. And not much is what we'll get. Floridians don't expect much. And not much is what we'll get. The Senate wanted sales tax 'holidays' for clothes, tools, hurricane preparedness, and 'Second Amendment Summer items,' i.e. cross bows, firearms, ammo. The House wanted to slash state sales taxes from six percent to 5.25%. Who knows which, and in what form, these proposals will survive the process. The governor hates all of it. He's been stomping around the state throwing tantrums about how lower sales taxes only help tourists and 'foreigners,' railing, 'I don't want to give Canadians a tax cut.' He might not have to worry about tax relief for those sinister Canadians much longer: They're selling their Florida condos and taking vacations in Mexico and Portugal instead. DeSantis' plan? Give every homeowner a $1,000 rebate. Then work up to abolishing property taxes altogether. Awesome! Lower taxes! Maybe no taxes! We hate taxes, right? Problem is, most of us love schools, sidewalks, roads, garbage pick-up, parks, police departments, fire departments, municipal pools, good drinking water, bike paths, animal shelters, electricity, and emergency medical services. Florida cities and counties depend on taxes to fund these. The House and Senate plan will reduce the state budget by $2.25 billion. That's likely to hurt everybody. No surprise. A number of measures passed this session are not exactly citizen-friendly. One example: Given our increasingly strong hurricanes and the floods they bring, the state should encourage people to rebuild more resilient structures. But no: A bill approved this session will block attempts to strengthen construction after storms. The idea is to 'streamline' the process (translation: Help developers who can sue if a local government institutes 'burdensome or restrictive' rules) so you can build your house or your business or your school back under the same outdated codes that failed to protect it last time. The bill also raises the price of flood insurance. Nice, huh? Another example: In a fit of good taste, the Senate refused to confirm some of DeSantis' more appalling University of West Florida board nominees, including yahoos who think the GI Bill was a bad idea or that women don't belong in higher education. Good for them. But legislators had a chance to do even more for higher education by putting college president searches back in the sunshine where they belong. Bills stopping the governor installing his hand-picked faith followers sailed through various committees, but in the end they were withdrawn. Fear of a gubernatorial melt-down? Line-item vetoes of pet projects? Presidents will still be chosen in secret subject to the whims of the governor and his tame boards of trustees. To be fair, the Legislature did decide to forbid oil and gas drilling within 10 miles of the Apalachicola Estuarine Reserve, and passed a bill to shield state parks from the kind of boneheaded nonsense the governor wanted in 2024: You know, 'improving' the parks with golf courses, pickleball courts, and luxury hotels. DeSantis actually realized (for once) he'd screwed up big time last year and signed the bill. This year, he demonstrated he hadn't quite learned his lesson. A secretive outfit calling itself Upland LLC wanted the state to give it 600 acres of preservation lands on the Guana River in St. Johns County in exchange for 3,000 acres of non-contiguous, less environmentally significant property scattered around four counties. Apparently, that swap sounded good to DeSantis. The state Acquisition and Restoration Council served up a report claiming there was nothing special about the Guana River land, no historic sites, no amazing habitat, nothing like that — never mind the ancient Native American shell middens, wood storks, roseate spoonbills, and old oak hammocks — and rushed the required public comment meeting. Genuine Floridians (the ones their government ignores) rose up on their hind legs and said hell, no. Loudly. Upland, its feelings hurt, pulled out of the deal — no thanks to DeSantis and his Department of Environmental Prostitution. Why, you ask, is this state so self-defeating? Or, to put it another way, why can't we have nice things? Florida has one of the most regressive taxation systems in the country, what the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy calls an 'upside down' model. The rich pay a far smaller percentage of their income than the middle classes and the poor. If the state decides to deprive itself — us — of tax dollars, we will all suffer. Florida's social safety net is already tattered. Twenty percent of children live in poverty. The state ranks 40th in child health and 45th in economic well-being. You'd think lawmakers would figure out helping to feed, educate, and take care of children is worth the money: Healthy, educated people contribute to the economy. But children don't vote. Or write big fat campaign checks. It's bad enough our so-called representatives can't do their jobs in a timely manner and must keep coming back for special sessions to decide which taxes to cut and by how much while simultaneously costing the taxpayer around $50,000 every day they hang around in Tallahassee. The governor, the most mobility impaired of waterfowl, his political career in the dumpster, his wife's charity under investigation for possible money laundering, still wants to abolish property taxes. Maybe he thinks that will give him a nice slogan to run for president on if we have an election in 2028. The Legislature wants to curry favor with their voters by giving them a break on stuff they buy. Everybody loves a bargain, right? But it's not much of a bargain if your quality of life goes to hell. Cities and counties are staring into the abyss, wondering how they'll fund everything citizens expect. School roofs won't be repaired, parks won't be maintained, bad water pipes won't be fixed, new cops won't be hired, EMS will be cut, potholes will proliferate. But hey, it's a small price to pay for a sales tax break on batteries and backpacks, right?
Yahoo
28-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Republican Party of Florida joins ballot initiative lawsuit in federal court
The Joseph Woodrow Hatchett U.S. Courthouse and Federal Building in Tallahassee, Sept. 27, 2022. (Photo by Michael Moline/Florida Phoenix) A federal court has given the Republican Party of Florida the green light to intervene in the legal challenge to Florida's recently enacted law (HB 1205) overhauling the processes used to collect signatures for ballot initiatives. 'We're pleased the court has recognized our stake in defending Florida's election integrity laws. This is an important first step in securing transparency, accountability, and the millions of Floridians,' Republican Party of Florida Chairman Evan Power said in a prepared release. 'We will continue fighting to protect the integrity of Florida's ballot and ensure voters are informed and confident in the process.' Florida Decides Healthcare and Smart & Safe Florida have challenged the new law — which was a top priority for Gov. Ron DeSantis — on ground that it violates their rights to free speech and due process. Florida Decides is working to put before the voters in November 2026 a proposed constitutional amendment to expand Medicaid to lower income childless adults, as allowed under the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare. Smart & Safe Florida wants to put an amendment to legalize marijuana for adults on the ballot in November 2026. Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Walker listened to about three hours of testimony late last week on Florida Decides' and Smart & Safe Florida's request that he block certain provisions of the law while the legal challenge moves ahead — including a requirement that sponsors turn in completed petitions within 10 days after the voter signs the petition, as well as stepped up fines and criminal penalties. Florida legislators passed the law after citizens' initiatives to allow abortion and recreational pot nearly passed last November. Critics contend that the new law — with all of its restrictions on groups and who can collect signatures — will make it nearly impossible for outside organizations to ever place an initiative on the ballot in the future. Supporters argue the law targets fraud in the initiative process. It's the first legal skirmish over Florida's new ballot initiative restrictions In court hearing, attorneys debate palatability of new restrictions on citizens' initiatives
Yahoo
22-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
State social media regulations return to Tallahassee after trip to U.S. Supreme Court
U.S. District Courthouse for the Northern District of Florida, Tallahassee. (Photo by Michael Moline/Florida Phoenix) Following years of legal wrangling, including a trip to the U.S. Supreme Court, a federal judge said Tuesday that he remains flummoxed about what the Legislature meant to accomplish by trying to limit social media content moderation. Northern District of Florida Judge Robert Hinkle said during proceeding in Tallahassee that he's still 'trying to figure out what the Legislature said, what it meant,' with the 2021 law. James Uthmeier inherited the case when Gov. Ron DeSantis appointed him Florida attorney general earlier this year. The legislation (SB 7072) came at DeSantis' insistence in the immediate aftermath of Donald Trump's banishment from social media platforms following the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol by some of his supporters. NetChoice and co-plaintiff Computer & Communications Industry Association represent a number of the biggest social media companies, including Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Reddit, Apple, and Pinterest. Hinkle issued an injunction against enforcing the law in 2021. Tuesday, during a hearing on the state's motion to dismiss, Hinkle said, 'I think I'm on my own' in deciding whether the law applies only to social media companies or to all websites. Even the Supreme Court couldn't figure out how to interpret the law, Hinkle said. That question became the theme of the hearing, with the judge saying he would decide what the law means and then order the parties to exchange evidence about to whom its provisions apply. CCIA said the Legislature didn't do a particularly clear job defining some elements of the law. 'We have done as much as we can to interpret this vague statute,' Stephanie Joyce, senior vice president for CCIA, told reporters following the hearing. The law prohibits social media platforms from deplatforming any candidate for statewide political office. It allows the Florida Election Commission to fine platforms (defined as companies with annual gross revenues of more than $100 million or more than 100 million monthly active users) $250,000 per day and $25,000 per day for any candidate for other offices. The state questioned whether CCIA and NetChoice were the correct plaintiffs to bring the suit, saying that neither is 'actually regulated by the law' and that they lack any cause of action. Ownership, structure, and financials of the tech companies could help the state refine its argument, its attorneys suggested. NetChoice's lawyers insisted the case is 'quintessential' in that it applies to a broad swath of its members. 'Florida stated three years ago they knew exactly or very closely who was covered by the statute. Then, when it suited their litigation tactics, they decided they didn't know what their own statute meant. As Judge Hinkle said today, it is quite remarkable that a state which is poised to lodge and impose monetary damages on companies now tells several courts they don't know who was covered by the statute,' Joyce said. When DeSantis signed the bill in 2021, he said, 'Maybe this isn't as much the bearded tyrant in the military fatigues — you know, maybe the person is in pajamas on their laptop drinking a soy latte in Silicon Valley. You know what, when they have the power to silence you, you take it seriously.' Authors of the bill included language asserting that 'social media platforms have transformed into the new public town square,' while CCIA replies that its members are private concerns. 'There is nothing more violative of the First Amendment than a government entity telling a private actor what to say,' Joyce said. Determining First Amendment protections for certain companies could come down to whether they are American or foreign-owned and what countries a company makes its executive decisions in. Joyce argued the state is avoiding key legal question in the case. 'The question that Judge Hinkle from the bench opined on today, which is that the Supreme Court stated very clearly that the state of Florida and the state of Texas may not tell a social media website, for example, Facebook, what it can post. That is a question Florida is struggling strenuously to avoid,' she said. Hinkle said he would respond to the motion to dismiss and hopes to 'get to this pretty quickly.' The matters of the case change depending on future legislative action, too, Hinkle reminded the parties. The state acknowledged First Amendment concerns with the law, but argued that the case as presented doesn't implicate those concerns. The Texas case involves a similar law but has languished since April 17. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
It's the first legal skirmish over Florida's new ballot initiative restrictions
Courthouse for the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida. (Photo by Michael Moline/Florida Phoenix) Florida's strict new law on ballot initiatives faces its first test in court on Thursday when Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Walker hears arguments about whether to block provisions in HB 1205. Several groups — including the organization that wants voters to expand Medicaid in the state — have challenged the law passed by the Republican-controlled Legislature that was a top priority for Gov. Ron DeSantis. Critics of the new law contend it will make it nearly impossible for outside groups to place initiatives on the ballot. In filings with federal court in Tallahassee, attorneys for Florida Decides Healthcare asked the court to block a requirement that sponsors deliver completed petitions to the voter's supervisor of elections office within 10 days after the voter signs the petition. Florida Decides and Smart & Safe Florida, the group behind a push to legalize marijuana, also want the court to enjoin the fines for delivering completed petitions late or to the wrong supervisor's office; signing another person's name or a fictitious name to any petition, or filling in missing information on a signed petition. Lastly, the groups are asking the court to enjoin the state from enforcing criminal penalties for violating sections of the law, arguing it is vague and overly broad. Voters in Florida over the last two decades have passed a number of initiatives that were opposed by GOP legislators, including measures that raised the state's minimum wage and allowed for the use of medical marijuana. Last November, two initiatives — including one on recreational marijuana and another on abortion — fell just below the 60% margin needed to win. Lawmakers responded with a bill that completely overhauls the process used to collect signatures. The first legal skirmish centers on whether to block the law while the underlying court battle moves on. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX William H. Stafford III, representing Attorney General James Uthmeier, has countered in his motion to dismiss that plaintiffs lack standing to bring the case because Florida Decides and Smart and Safe wouldn't be subject to the fines they are seeking to waive. '[A]s far as the Secretary and Attorney General can tell, not one of Plaintiffs declarants stated that they have ever signed another person's name or a fictitious name on a petition, or filled in missing information 'on a signed petition' , or ever intend to.' Stafford argues that the fines are optional and 'may' be waived — another reason the groups lack standing, meaning they have a stake in the outcome. Stafford additionally defended HB 1205. 'Florida's initiative petition process has a problem. Circulators sometimes forge voters' signatures on petitions. Sometimes they sign for the deceased. Sometimes they misappropriate voter information. Some commit identity theft,' he wrote. 'Petition sponsors fail to timely submit completed petitions to supervisors of elections, resulting in thousands of dollars in penalties. And the problems are magnified when petition sponsors use out-of-state petition circulators, contractors, and subcontractors, who lack ties to Florida and don't respect its law enforcements' subpoena power.' In her response to the state, Matletha Bennette, an attorney with the Southern Poverty Law Center representing Florida Decides, agreed with Stafford one one point: 'As defendants say, Florida's petition process has a problem — namely the State sometimes passes laws illegally restricting it.' Bennette argued that the state's position that the group lacks standing is incorrect. 'Plaintiffs need not show that they have violated or intend to violate the law, or that it is 'guaranteed' that the State will impose penalties,' she wrote. Additionally, citing the arguments of Smart & Safe in its filing, Bennette argues: 'Even if it were logistically possible to consistently comply with the ten-day return rule, it is impossible to do so (a) without incurring significantly greater costs and diverting organizational resources and (b) forgoing quality control measures to guard against HB 1205's other penalties,' she wrote. 'The First Amendment bars the Hobson's choice HB 1205 demands: curtail core protected speech in an attempt to comply with the law, and likely fail to collect enough signatures for a successful campaign, or risk criminal liability and severe financial penalties that would bankrupt the organization. Defendants' suggestion that the State may, in its beneficence, waive penalties it has otherwise assessed does not 'ameliorate' Plaintiffs' harm.' Florida Decides has been working for more than a year to get its proposed constitutional amendment to expand Medicaid on the statewide ballot in November 2026. It filed the underlying lawsuit three days after DeSantis signed the law. Smart & Safe, the group behind the proposed constitutional amendment to legalize recreational use of cannabis in 2024, is actively working to place another measure on the ballot in 2026 The new law stems from a January report published by the state's Office of Election Crimes and Security asserting that more than 100 representatives of the group attempting to pass the abortion-rights amendment last year committed crimes related to gathering petitions. The bill: Prohibits felons, noncitizens, and non-Florida residents from acting as petition circulators. Requires additional personal identifying information for voters signing petition forms and for petition circulators. Requires the sponsor to deliver petitions to supervisors of elections in the counties in which the voter resides within 10 days after the voter signs the form. And says that anyone who doesn't register with the state as a signature-gatherer and possesses more than 25 signed petitions beyond their own and immediate family members' faces a third-degree felony punishable by up to five years in prison. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
