The US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit on Wednesday reversed a lower court’s preliminary injunction against Florida’s law restricting minors’ access to social media, holding that the law is likely constitutional under the First Amendment.

Writing for a unanimous panel, Judge Kevin Newsom concluded that Florida House Bill 3 (HB3) implicated the social media company’s First Amendment rights in curating content and communication with users. However, the court found it did so in a content-neutral manner, meaning it does not target particular speech. The law therefore was subject to intermediate scrutiny rather than strict scrutiny. The court held it likely survives that review because it advances the important governmental interest in protecting minors from social media addiction and does not burden substantially more speech than necessary to further that interest.

HB3, signed into law in May 2024, requires social media platforms that use “addictive features” to prohibit minors under 14 from creating or maintaining accounts, and to obtain parental consent before allowing minors aged 14 and 15 to do so. The court found the law sufficiently tailored: It applies only to those age groups and does not restrict access to the site. Additionally, it applies only to social media sites where at least 10 percent of daily active users under 16 spend an average of at least two hours on the site daily. Finally, it covers only sites using designated “addictive” features and algorithms, such as infinite scrolling, push notifications, personal interactive metrics, autoplay, or live streaming.

Internet trade associations, representing major social media companies, challenged this law on First Amendment grounds in 2024. The US District Court for the Northern District of Florida granted a preliminary injunction in March 2025. The Eleventh Circuit stayed that order pending appeal, and in Wednesday’s opinion, reversed and vacated the injunction.

The ruling follows several recent federal appellate court decisions reversing injunctions involving state restrictions on minors’ social media use. Earlier this year, the Sixth Circuit upheld an Ohio law restricting minor’s access to social media, and last year the Ninth Circuit blocked an injunction against most provisions of a California law. Many district courts applying strict scrutiny have enjoined similar state laws, often finding them too broad.