TALLAHASSEE – Saying social media is “facing a reckoning,” Florida fired back Monday against a lawsuit challenging a new state law aimed at keeping children off social media platforms.

Attorney General Ashley Moody’s office filed two documents urging a federal judge to dismiss the lawsuit and to deny a preliminary injunction that social media industry groups are seeking to block the measure.

The law was one of the highest-profile issues of the 2024 legislative session, with lawmakers saying that addictive social media platforms harm children. But the Computer & Communications Industry Association and NetChoice, whose members include tech giants such as Google and Meta Platforms, filed the challenge in October, contending the law violates First Amendment rights and that parents should make decisions about children’s social media use.

The state’s filings Monday raised a series of arguments, including that the industry groups do not have legal standing to challenge the law (HB 3) and that the law’s restrictions do not violate speech rights.

“The statute regulates purely commercial activity – transacting with children while using harmful features to addict them,” the state’s attorneys wrote in opposing a preliminary injunction. “Minors have no First Amendment right to contract for products designed to addict them. HB 3 is also a reasonable, content-neutral time, place, and manner restriction. It regulates only the manner in which children engage with social media.”

But in the lawsuit, attorneys for the industry groups said Florida “cannot begin to show that its draconian access restrictions are necessary to advance any legitimate interest it may assert.”

“Parents already have a wealth of tools at their disposal to limit what online services their minor children use, what they can do on those services, and how often they can use them,” the lawsuit said. “Florida may wish that more Floridians shared its own views about whether minors should use ‘social media platforms.’ But while the state may take many steps to protect minors from harm, including by persuading parents to take advantage of tools to limit their minor children’s access to ‘social media platforms,’ it may not take matters into its own hands and restrict access itself.”

The law, which was spearheaded by then-House Speaker Paul Renner, R-Palm Coast, was scheduled to take effect Jan. 1. But Moody agreed in November to delay enforcement until Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Wilson rules on the injunction request. Walker has scheduled a Feb. 28 hearing.

The law, in part, seeks to prevent children under age 16 from opening social media accounts on certain platforms – though it would allow parents to give consent for 14- and 15-year-olds to have accounts. Children under 14 could not open accounts.

The law does not name social-media platforms that would be affected. But it includes a definition of such platforms, with criteria related to such things as algorithms, “addictive features” and allowing users to view the content or activities of other users.

The lawsuit repeatedly referred to sites such as YouTube and Facebook – while also saying the law would not apply to services such as Disney+.

“While the law purports to address ‘addictive features,’ it does not restrict access to all mediums that employ similar features to engage their audience,” attorneys for the industry groups wrote. “The law leaves services like Disney+, Hulu, and Roblox uncovered, even though many minors spend hours on those services each day, and even though they employ the same so-called ‘addictive features,’ like personalized algorithms, push notifications, and autoplay. The state’s only evident justification for restricting access to Facebook and YouTube while leaving many other mediums for speech untouched is the state’s apparent belief that the covered websites deliver content the state thinks is particularly harmful.”

The state’s motion to dismiss the case, however, argued the law does not trigger “heightened First Amendment scrutiny.”

“The law limits children from having accounts on platforms that traffic in addiction,” the motion said. “It leaves platforms free to present content to children and adults through non-addictive means and free to present material to children who do not hold accounts. That affects only a child’s ability to ‘enter’ certain online businesses – it does not in any way censor children on the internet.”

If social-media companies violate the law they could face penalties up to $50,000 per violation. The law also would open them to lawsuits filed on behalf of minors.

“Social media is facing a reckoning,” the state’s attorneys wrote in opposing a preliminary injunction. “Because of whistleblowers and leaked internal documents, the public has learned that social-media companies for years have deployed features to addict youth with full awareness of the destruction compulsive use has on children’s mental health.”

Meanwhile, a separate pending lawsuit challenges the constitutionality of another part of the law that requires age verification to try to prevent minors from having access to online pornographic sites. That lawsuit was filed by different plaintiffs.

ORLANDO, Fla. – What we know: A 23-year-old woman from Altoona was killed Tuesday morning in a crash involving a dump truck and a sedan on County Road 439 near County Road 44A, authorities said.

The Florida Highway Patrol said the crash occurred at approximately 8:23 a.m. when a 1994 dump truck traveling northbound on CR-439 encountered stopped traffic. The driver, a 28-year-old man from Leesburg, attempted to brake but veered into the southbound lane, colliding head-on with a 2019 Toyota Corolla.

The driver of the Corolla was transported to AdventHealth Waterman Hospital, where she was pronounced dead, troopers said. The dump truck driver was not injured and remained at the scene.

Both directions of CR-439 remain blocked as authorities continue to investigate. No additional details have been released.

A full media release will be provided as more information becomes available.

STAY CONNECTED WITH FOX 35 ORLANDO:

MARION COUNTY, Fla. – A years-long legal battle over a deadly confrontation has ended with a jury acquitting a man of second-degree murder charges stemming from a dispute over a cat.

James Taylor, 41, was fatally shot during an argument with his neighbor. 

What led to the deadly confrontation?

The backstory:

The incident occurred on October 20, 2021, in Southeast Marion County, north of Umatilla, and reportedly began when Taylor’s cat crossed onto the neighbor’s property, leading to a confrontation. 

According to investigators, the neighbor, Clifton Anthony Bliss Jr., armed himself with a rifle and approached Taylor’s home, where the argument escalated.

The sheriff’s office arrested Bliss Jr. on a second-degree murder charge. Last week, a jury found Bliss Jr. not guilty after determining his actions were reasonable under the circumstances.

What they’re saying:

Taylor’s fiancée, Crystal Mitchell, expressed disbelief over the tragedy. “For that to end up like that? It’s unbelievable,” she said. Mitchell, who declined to appear on camera, said Taylor was a helpful neighbor, adding, “James wasn’t the kind to walk around and just threaten anybody and everybody with violence — that was not him.”

Legal experts say such cases hinge on proving an imminent threat of deadly force.

Criminal defense attorney Michael Panella, who was not involved in the case, emphasized the importance of de-escalation in conflicts. 

“Your best self-defense are … nonverbal and verbal cues, being able to de-escalate something and actually removing yourself from a dangerous situation,” Panella said. “The last resort, the absolute last resort, is using deadly force.”

Bliss Jr. declined to comment on his acquittal. 

Mitchell hopes her story reminds others that violence is never the answer.

STAY CONNECTED WITH FOX 35 ORLANDO: