Latest news with #NetChoice
Yahoo
13-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Vermont signs Kids Code into law, faces legal challenges
MONTPELIER, Vt. (ABC22/FOX44) – One of the ten bills Vermont Governor Phil Scott signed Thursday has the goal of making Vermont children safer online. The bill faces challenges in court, but its supporters say it is necessary in a rapidly changing world. Senate Bill 69, known as the Vermont Kids Code, aims to protect kids from 'abusive' practices of social media companies. Governor Phil Scott, in his statement on signing the bill, said, 'As we see more and more kids using technology, I believe most would agree we need to take steps to protect them in a reasonable and responsible way when they're online.' ACLU Vermont releases statement following Scott's hotel-motel transition bill veto Among other provisions, the bill prohibits companies from selling children's data, keeps parents and other adults from secretly using apps to track kids, and making it so adults cannot message children without their explicit and unambiguous assent. It also says that social media companies must have push notifications disabled by default on children's accounts. Read the full text of the bill hereDownload Other states have recently passed similar laws, such as Maryland's Kids Code and California's Age-Appropriate Design Code. They have faced lawsuits on free speech grounds, with judges blocking enforcement of the laws until litigation is resolved. NetChoice, the advocacy group behind those lawsuits, says the goal to protect children is just an excuse to police speech online. Bus 'totaled' after catching fire in Mount Holly 'An unconstitutional law will not keep anyone safe,' said NetChoice vice president Carl Szabo about the Maryland law. Scott referenced the current legal struggles in his statement, saying, 'With ongoing lawsuits in other states, I recognize this new law will likely face a legal challenge. But I'm hopeful with the enactment of this law delayed until January 1, 2027, it will allow enough time to provide clarity and change the law if necessary.' Kaitlynn Cherry, a youth advocate from Sunderland, said Vermont needs to be proactive. 'Our future selves will thank us when we have safety, privacy, and autonomy in our digital experiences.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
06-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Social media giants ask judge to block Georgia age verification law
Social media companies have filed a federal lawsuit challenging a new Georgia law that would create new online age restrictions for minors. A June 3 hearing was held in the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of Georgia in downtown Atlanta. Jill Nolin/Georgia Recorder A federal judge heard arguments this week on a Georgia law aimed at restricting social media use for minors and requiring Georgians to confirm their age before viewing adult websites. Judge Amy Totenberg of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia announced at the Tuesday hearing that she will determine soon whether to hear more evidence regarding a lawsuit by a group called NetChoice to stop the law. NetChoice represents various internet-based services, including powerful businesses like Google and Meta, as well as smaller companies like online journal site Dreamwidth Studios. On the same day, a Florida judge blocked sections of a similar Florida law. Children under the age of 16 would need parental consent to open social media accounts under the new Georgia law, which is set to go into effect July 1. NetChoice filed a lawsuit in May seeking to prevent that from happening. The companies claim the rules violate young people's First Amendment rights, as well as place unnecessary burdens on social media companies. Attorneys also argued the revised rules strip away some of the flexibility of parents monitoring what online sites their children are accessing. Jeremy Maltz, an attorney representing NetChoice in the lawsuit, argued at Tuesday's court hearing that many people using online websites affected by the Georgia law would consider it an invasion of privacy if they had to use sensitive information to create an account. The plaintiffs argue that adults could face a burden if companies require them to potentially give companies driver licenses, banking or credit card information or use facial recognition software in order to access user-generated online sites. Data breaches and other cyber security threats could be increased by the new age guidelines, Maltz said. 'We know people are going to have to provide some sort of information to access protected speech,' he said. And despite the law exempting educational, public safety, and professional networking platforms, Martz said it would also create new verification hurdles even for innocuous sites such as college football and recipe message boards. 'This bill targets minors at the places where minors go to engage in free speech,' Maltz said. Republican state lawmakers push for Georgia law to require proof of adulthood to view adult websites Georgia lawmakers passed SB 351 in 2024 with bipartisan support. Logan Winkles, a state deputy attorney general, said that social media is designed to drive engagement and promote addiction, and the intent of legislators in passing the law was to protect children from adult bad actors online. 'Everyone agrees that social media poses some risk to children,' Winkles said. NetChoice successfully overturned similar laws in Arkansas and Ohio after arguing they unfairly censored free speech on online platforms. The bill requires social media companies to make commercially reasonable efforts to verify the age of their users, which can be done through methods including banking and credit card accounts, facial and fingerprint recognition software scanning. The Age Verification Providers Association, which supports third-party age verification businesses, reports that about a dozen states have passed laws restricting or requiring parents to consent to minors accessing social media. In several states, including Arkansas, California and Ohio, court orders have been issued to block the provisions of the law. As of May, the age verification group listed Georgia among the 24 states that have passed laws requiring age verification to access online pornography. Opponents say such laws could create privacy concerns and prevent people from accessing constitutionally protected speech. Winkles said at Tuesday's hearing that legislators and Gov. Brian Kemp backed the law to protect more kids and teens from social media sites that lead to higher rates of bullying and mental health problems such as depression and that technology can estimate a person's age without revealing their identity. 'What we know is there are many other ways to verify ID other than showing government ID,' Winkles said. But Totenberg questioned the verification processes. 'It doesn't seem very precise,' Totenberg said. 'It's a highly subjective standard and I'm not sure what it ultimately means.' The law allows parents and guardians to file complaints with the attorney general office if they believe a company isn't complying with age verification. Violations of the law may result in a fine of up to $2,500 per violation. On Tuesday, federal Judge Mark Walker of the northern district of Florida blocked sections of Florida's law banning children under 14 from having social media accounts and requiring parents' approval for teens as old as 16 while expressing concerns about social media's adverse effects on children. Georgia attorneys contend that the state's new social media rules stand up to legal scrutiny and differ from states like Florida, which limited companies' ability to control user-posted content. Right wing officials from several states have expressed concerns about social media companies blocking conservative viewpoints. John Acevedo, an Emory University constitutional law professor, pointed out that when it's pornography, there has been a legal history showing a legitimate interest in protecting children. 'Really, it's not controversial to put an age requirement in, but the controversy is the manner in which the age requirement is implemented,' he said Wednesday. 'Conversely, in social media there's a controversy over whether we should even limit social media at all to any age group.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
New York Post
04-06-2025
- General
- New York Post
Florida's social media ban for kids halted by federal judge
A federal judge has granted a preliminary injunction against Florida's HB 3, a law regarding youth and social media accounts. Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Walker in Tallahassee says in court documents obtained by FOX Business that the law is a violation of the First Amendment's protections on free speech. Walker's ruling on Tuesday sides with trade groups NetChoice and Computer and Communications Industry Association, putting HB 3 on hold until the litigation is resolved. 'Today's ruling is yet another affirmation that the government cannot control or censor online speech. Like all Americans, Floridians have the right to access lawful speech without the government controlling what they say, share or see online,' Chris Marchese, NetChoice Director of Litigation, said in a statement. 'Lawmakers should focus on real, constitutional alternatives that respect both family autonomy and free speech,' he continued. HB 3 requires social media platforms to bar users under the age of 14 and requires users 16 and under to have parental consent before opening an account. Getty Images Jeremy Redfern, a spokesman for Republican Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier, whose office is defending the law, said in a statement obtained by Reuters that the 'platforms do not have a constitutional right to addict kids to their products.' Uthmeier's office plans to appeal it to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, he said. HB 3 requires social media platforms to bar users under the age of 14 and requires users under 16 to get parental consent before opening an account. It was supposed to go into effect Jan. 1, but was put on hold due to litigation. 'Today's ruling is yet another affirmation that the government cannot control or censor online speech,' NetChoice's director said. Getty Images NetChoice, which represents social media platforms, has won injunctions in recent months against similar laws in Utah and California that restricted the use of social media platforms by youths. In Tuesday's ruling, Walker said he appreciated that parents are concerned about their children's social media use, but that other, unchallenged provisions of the law offered them recourse. The industry groups did not address some parts of the law that directed social media companies to delete youth accounts at parental request.
Yahoo
04-06-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Federal judge halts Florida's social media ban for kids
A federal judge has granted a preliminary injunction against Florida's HB 3, a law regarding youth and social media accounts. Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Walker in Tallahassee says in court documents obtained by FOX Business that the law is a violation of the First Amendment's protections on free speech. Walker's ruling on Tuesday sides with trade groups NetChoice and Computer and Communications Industry Association, putting HB 3 on hold until the litigation is resolved. "Today's ruling is yet another affirmation that the government cannot control or censor online speech. Like all Americans, Floridians have the right to access lawful speech without the government controlling what they say, share or see online," Chris Marchese, NetChoice Director of Litigation, said in a statement. Texas Bill Pushes Strictest Social Media Ban For Minors In The Nation "Lawmakers should focus on real, constitutional alternatives that respect both family autonomy and free speech," he continued. Read On The Fox Business App Jeremy Redfern, a spokesman for Republican Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier, whose office is defending the law, said in a statement obtained by Reuters that the "platforms do not have a constitutional right to addict kids to their products." Uthmeier's office plans to appeal it to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, he said. Snapchat 'Openly Defying' Law, Allowing Kids Access To Harmful, Addictive Content: Florida Ag HB 3 requires social media platforms to bar users under the age of 14 and requires users under 16 to get parental consent before opening an account. It was supposed to go into effect Jan. 1, but was put on hold due to litigation. NetChoice, which represents social media platforms, has won injunctions in recent months against similar laws in Utah and California that restricted the use of social media platforms by youths. Click Here To Read More On Fox Business In Tuesday's ruling, Walker said he appreciated that parents are concerned about their children's social media use, but that other, unchallenged provisions of the law offered them recourse. The industry groups did not address some parts of the law that directed social media companies to delete youth accounts at parental request. Reuters contributed to this report. Original article source: Federal judge halts Florida's social media ban for kids
Engadget
04-06-2025
- Politics
- Engadget
Florida's social media law has been temporarily blocked by a federal judge
A federal judge has temporarily blocked Florida's new law that bans some children from using social media and requires parental consent for others, according to court documents. Judge Mark Walker ruled in favor of two tech organizations (NetChoice and the CCIA) representing social media organizations like Meta, Snap and X, saying that the state's bill HB3 signed into law in March this year is "likely unconstitutional." The law requires parent or guardian consent for 14- and 15-year-olds to make an account or use a pre-existing account on a social media platform, while children under 14 are banned altogether. Platforms must abide by requests to delete these accounts within five business days and each violation could result in a $10,000 fine. That increases to $50,000 per instance if it is ruled that the company participated in a 'knowing or reckless' violation of the law. "Floridians have the right to access lawful speech without the government controlling what they say, share or see online,' said NetChoice Director of Litigation, Chris Marchese. The state of Florida tried to bypass normal first amendment free speech protections by employing the "narrowly tailored" rules, saying the law is designed to protect children from five addictive features of social media: push notifications, auto-play videos, live streaming, infinite scrolling and personal metrics. However, the judge ruled that the application is too broad in ways that have been shot down before by the Supreme Court. "As applied to Plaintiffs' members alone, the law likely bans all youth under 14 from holding accounts on, at a minimum, four websites that provide forums for all manner of protected speech: Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, and Snapchat," Judge Walker wrote. "It also bans 14- and 15-year-olds from holding accounts on those four websites absent a parent's affirmative consent, a requirement that the Supreme Court has clearly explained the First Amendment does not countenance." Children could also be banned from social media even if the platforms created youth accounts without any of the five addictive features — as long as they were available for adults. The judge also called out the law's specificities about the ability of a child to access a platform based on how much time all children spend on the app. The ruling does leave one provision in place. Social media companies are still required to "terminate any account held by a youth under 16 in the state upon the request of a parent or guardian," as required by the bill. Yahoo, the parent company of Engadget, is a member of NetChoice.
