What Is Florida HB3? Age Rules, Verification, and Enforcement

Florida’s HB 3 social media law bars children under 14 from holding accounts on covered platforms, requires parental consent for 14- and 15-year-olds, and gives parents the power to force an account closed. Signed in March 2024 and codified at Florida Statutes sections 501.1736 through 501.1738, it took effect January 1, 2025. A federal judge blocked it that June, but the Eleventh Circuit stayed that block on November 25, 2025, so the law is being enforced now while the appeal continues.

What the Age Rules Say

The law draws a hard line at 14. A child younger than 14 cannot create or keep an account on a covered platform, and parental consent does not override that restriction. Platforms must refuse new accounts for this age group.¹

For 14- and 15-year-olds, a parent or guardian decides. The minor can hold an account only if a parent affirmatively consents. The statute does not spell out how consent must be given. It does not require a credit card, a government ID scan, or a video call. It simply has to happen before the account exists.²

Parents keep a kill switch after consenting. A confirmed parent or guardian can ask a platform at any time to terminate their child’s account, and the platform must comply. A minor of any age who wants out can also request termination of their own account, and the platform has five business days to complete it.¹

Which Platforms Are Covered

The law does not name Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, YouTube, or any other service. Instead, a platform is covered only if it meets all four of these criteria: it lets users post content or see other users’ activity; at least 10 percent of its daily users under 16 average two or more hours a day on it; it uses algorithms to pick what users see; and it has at least one “addictive feature.”¹

The statute lists five addictive features, and a platform only needs one to clear that part of the test: infinite scrolling, push notifications, personal interactive metrics (like counts of reactions or shares), auto-play video, and live-streaming. The two-hour threshold is measured over the previous 12 months, or the previous month for platforms less than a year old.

Services whose only function is email or direct messaging between a specific sender and recipient are explicitly excluded. Cloud storage and news-only sites generally fall outside the definition because they lack the mix of user-generated content, algorithmic feeds, and addictive design the law targets. Because the test depends on actual usage data and features, whether a specific app you have in mind is covered is a question only that platform’s own numbers can answer.

What Happens to Accounts a Child Already Has

The rules apply to accounts that already existed when the law took effect, not just new ones. If a platform determines an existing user is under 14, including cases where it has been treating the account as belonging to someone likely under 14 for ad targeting, the account must be terminated. The user gets a 90-day window to dispute the age determination before termination becomes final.²

The same 90-day process applies to 14- and 15-year-olds whose accounts lack parental consent. If a parent does not step forward to consent during that window, the account must be closed.²

When a minor’s account is terminated under the law for any reason, the platform must permanently delete the personal information tied to it, unless some other law requires that data be retained.

How Age Gets Verified and What Happens to the Data

Platforms have to verify users’ ages, but the law gives them room on method. Florida’s administrative rules recognize three acceptable approaches: standard age verification using any commercially reasonable method the platform approves, anonymous age verification run by an independent third party, or any method government agencies or businesses regularly use for age and identity checks.³

The statute does not name facial age estimation or biometric scanning, and it does not forbid them either. In practice, the verification experience will vary by platform.

Because the collection of verification data creates its own privacy risk, section 501.1738 puts rules on the third parties that run anonymous verification. They cannot retain personal identifying information once age has been verified. They cannot repurpose it for marketing, analytics, or anything else. The information has to stay anonymous and cannot be shared with any other person or entity, and the third party must protect it with reasonable security practices. The third party itself has to be a U.S.-based, independent company that is not owned or controlled by a foreign government or foreign-formed entity.²

Is the Law Being Enforced Right Now

Yes, as of late 2025. The path there was bumpy. NetChoice, a trade group representing major platforms, challenged HB 3 on First Amendment grounds. On June 3, 2025, Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Walker issued a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement.

On November 25, 2025, a divided panel of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals stayed that injunction 2-1, letting Florida enforce the law while the full appeal plays out. The majority found HB 3 content-neutral, reasoning that it restricts account access based on platform design features rather than the topics users discuss, and noted that minors are not blocked from accessing social media content, only from holding accounts on platforms with addictive features and heavy minor engagement.⁴ The dissenting judge called the law “plainly unconstitutional on its face.”

After the ruling, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier gave platforms 30 days to put age restrictions in place and 60 days to stand up parental consent systems, and said his office would sue noncompliant companies. The full appeal is still working its way through the Eleventh Circuit, and the case could eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court, so the legal picture could shift again.

What Platforms Face If They Don’t Comply

Violations are treated as deceptive and unfair trade practices under Florida law, which lets the Department of Legal Affairs investigate and sue. A platform that knowingly or recklessly violates the law faces civil penalties up to $50,000 per violation, plus attorney fees and costs.¹

Minors have their own right to sue. If a platform knowingly or recklessly violates the account rules, the affected minor can recover up to $10,000 in damages along with court costs and reasonable attorney fees.¹ Both tracks require proof the platform acted knowingly or recklessly, so a good-faith verification effort that occasionally misses an underage user sits in a different place than ignoring the law outright.

A Separate Rule for Harmful-Content Sites

HB 3 also contains a provision that is easy to confuse with the account rules but works differently. Section 501.1737 requires websites where more than one-third of the material qualifies as harmful to minors to verify that users are 18 or older before granting access. The site must offer both anonymous and standard verification options, and the user chooses. Bona fide news sites and public interest broadcasts are exempt.⁵ This is a separate requirement from the social media account restrictions, aimed at a different category of sites and using an 18-year-old threshold rather than the 14 and 16 cutoffs that drive the account rules.

1
Florida Legislature. Florida Statutes 501.1736 – Social Media Use for Minors
2
Florida Senate. Enrolled CS/CS/HB 3, Engrossed 1
3
Cornell Law Institute. Florida Admin Code Ann R 2-43-002 – Social Media Use for Minors
4
NetChoice. 11th Circuit CCIA NetChoice v Uthmeier HB 3 Ruling
5
Florida Legislature. Florida Statutes 501.1737 – Age Verification for Online Access to Materials Harmful to Minors