Florida and Georgia are moving closer to restricting how children use social media after a federal appeals court cleared the way for both states to enforce laws requiring age verification or parental permission.
The rulings, issued last month by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, overturned earlier decisions that had blocked enforcement of the laws.
Supporters say the restrictions will help protect children from addictive social media features, online predators and mental health risks. Moreover, proponents allege that platforms are unable to reliably determine someone's age without collecting personal information.
However, critics contend that keeping children off the platforms could also prevent them from accessing legitimate information, communicating with friends and participating in online communities.
Two States, Two Approaches to Social Media Safety
Although Florida and Georgia share the goal of protecting children online, their laws take different approaches.
Florida's House Bill 3 prohibits children under 14 from creating or maintaining accounts on covered social media platforms, even with parental permission.
Teenagers ages 14 and 15 can maintain accounts only with parental consent.
The restrictions apply to platforms meeting certain criteria involving algorithms and engagement features such as infinite scrolling, autoplay, livestreaming and push notifications.
Georgia's Senate Bill 351 requires covered social media platforms to make reasonable efforts to verify users' ages and obtain parental consent before allowing children under 16 to open accounts.
Georgia also restricts certain forms of targeted advertising directed at younger users.
Both laws were challenged by technology industry groups, including NetChoice, which argued that the restrictions violate First Amendment protections.
Lower courts initially blocked enforcement. But the October appellate rulings removed those preliminary injunctions, allowing the states to move toward implementation while litigation continues.
Are Social Media Restrictions Actually Protecting Children?
For lawmakers, the motivation is straightforward.
Social media platforms use sophisticated recommendation algorithms and engagement features that encourage users to spend more time online.
Children and teenagers may be particularly susceptible to compulsive use, prompting concerns about depression, anxiety, sleep disruption and other mental health problems.
Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier and Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr have defended their states' restrictions as necessary responses to those risks.
But digital rights advocates argue that the approach could create unintended consequences.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit organization focused on digital privacy and free expression, warns that age restrictions could prevent teenagers from participating in lawful online activities.
Social media isn't exclusively a source of entertainment. Young people also use online platforms to communicate with friends, find support communities, discuss school issues and express themselves.
A teenager who uses an online group for mental health support, for example, could lose access because of age restrictions intended to protect that same teenager's well-being.
The EFF also argues that requiring users to verify their ages could expose adults and children to additional privacy risks.
The Privacy Problem With Age Verification
Age verification sounds simple enough. A platform needs to determine whether a user is old enough to create an account.
But accomplishing that can involve collecting or processing sensitive information.
Depending on how platforms implement the requirements, users might be asked to provide identification, undergo facial age estimation or use third-party verification services.
In addition to questions about data security, retention and potential misuse, there's also the possibility of errors.
An adult could be incorrectly classified as a minor, while teenagers might find ways around restrictions using inaccurate birth dates or other methods.
The challenge for lawmakers is designing a system that restricts access where required without unnecessarily collecting personal information from everyone else.
How These Rulings Fit Into the Social Media Harm Debate
The Florida and Georgia decisions arrive as social media companies face growing legal pressure over the effects of their platforms on young people.
Thousands of lawsuits allege that companies including Meta, TikTok, Google and Snap designed platforms to encourage compulsive use, contributing to serious mental health injuries among children and teenagers.
Many of the federal claims are consolidated in Social Media Adolescent Addiction/Personal Injury Products Liability Litigation, known as MDL 3047.
The state laws address related concerns, but they're separate from the personal injury litigation.
California has taken yet another approach, seeking to restrict certain engagement features for children under 16 rather than banning younger users from maintaining accounts altogether.
Google, Meta and TikTok filed lawsuits challenging California's legislation in early November.
Together, these developments illustrate how lawmakers, courts and families are approaching the same underlying concern from different directions.
Some want to restrict access. Others want to change how platforms operate. Families pursuing injury claims are seeking accountability for harm they attribute to the technology.
What Happens Next?
The October rulings don't end the constitutional challenges to Florida's and Georgia's laws.
Both cases can continue in lower courts, and additional appeals remain possible.
The practical effects will also depend on how individual platforms implement age verification, parental consent and account restrictions.
For now, the rulings represent a significant development in the debate over children's online safety.
Protecting young people from harmful social media experiences is one challenge. Doing so without unnecessarily limiting their privacy, expression and access to information may prove just as difficult.
References
- Mullin J. Two States Can Now Restrict Social Media Access—Here's What To Do Next. Electronic Frontier Foundation. October 23, 2026.
- Computer & Communications Industry Association v. Attorney General of Florida. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. October 14, 2026.
- NetChoice, LLC v. Carr. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. October 15, 2026.
- Perry M. Appeals Court Lifts Block on Florida Law Restricting Social Media Access for Teens. News From The States. October 14, 2026.
- Georgia Office of the Attorney General. Carr Secures Major Victory in Defense of Georgia's Social Media Law. October 15, 2026.