ORLANDO, Fla. — The state of Florida is defending itself in a lawsuit over House Bill 3, a new law designed to prevent minors from accessing online content deemed harmful.

What You Need To Know

  • House Bill 3 requires websites hosting material deemed harmful to minors to verify users’ age and identity, with penalties of up to $50,000 per violation

  • The Free Speech Coalition claims the bill is poorly designed, allowing many sites to bypass the rules, and advocates for device-based filters as a better solution

  • The Free Speech Coalition has challenged the law in court, citing concerns over free speech, regulatory overreach, and the law’s effectiveness in preventing minors from accessing adult content

The legislation, championed by Republican State Representative Chase Tramont of District 3, empowers the Florida Attorney General to impose civil penalties of up to $50,000 per violation on websites that fail to verify the age and identity of users.

The law requires sites hosting adult material to implement stringent verification methods, such as uploading government IDs or facial recognition scans. Tramont calls the measure “commonsense legislation” aimed at protecting children.

“It’s pretty rare and unique to come to such a big bill like this where everybody is on board,” said Tramont. “We just don’t believe children should have access to this kind of material. We don’t allow kids to see R-rated movies, and this should be no different.”

The legislation passed unanimously in the Florida legislature and has already been signed into law by Gov. Ron DeSantis. However, it faces a legal challenge from the Free Speech Coalition, a nonprofit organization advocating for the rights of individuals and businesses in the adult industry.

The Free Speech Coalition argues that the law is ineffective and will not achieve its stated goal. The group’s Director of Public Policy, Mike Stabile, criticized the bill’s approach, noting that many websites with adult content are exempt from the law if such material comprises less than a third of their total content.

“The way HB 3 works is it says if you have less than a third of your content on your site, then you don’t have to comply with this law,” Stabile explained. “That means tons of sites with adult content are not age-verified. It’s tremendously ineffective.”

Stabile also highlighted other ways to safeguard minors, such as device-based filters, which he claims are more effective than the measures outlined in the bill.

“The biggest misinformation in this movement is that we want minors on our sites. We don’t. We’ve made it easy to block adult sites for decades, and we’ve consistently advocated for better tools like filters to prevent access,” Stabile said.

While supporters of the bill emphasize its child protection goals, critics argue it may have broader implications for free speech.

Tramont dismissed these concerns, stating the bill does not restrict speech or regulate the content itself. “We’re not telling them they can’t exist or what they can show. This is simply about making sure children don’t have access to inappropriate material.”

Sites may not use government entities to verify an individual’s identity.

The bill went into effect on New Year’s Day.